1

UN WERSITY U N I VEHSITZ' -- . Simon Sraaer University . - . -- -- - - DEGfIEt FOR WICH THESIS WAS VESENTED

G'RALlt POUR LEQUEL CETTE THESE FUT P R ~ S C N I ~ E of ScLeIlce (Education) - . :

NAME OF~SUPERVISOR/NOM DU DIRECT& DE T H ~ S E - D ~ - m ~ i n Wideen -. - -- - . - - - - - - -

Perln~ssion is hereby gr&tedL to ~ ~ E N A T I W A L LIBRARY OF 1 O a u t ~ ~ s a t i o n est, par la pr&ente, accordt?e B la S ~ B L I O T H ~ - . .

CANADA to rnicrditm Ulis thesis-and to land or sell copies QUE NATIONALE DU C A P M A de miuofilrner getre Nldse el

of the film. de prgter wr de vendre des exemplaires du film. - I , ,

he author reserrs other publ~cation rights, and neither>the L'auteur se rkserve les autres droits de publication. ,Ti la /

1 ' thesls nu extensive extracts from it m a y be pinted or other- thesenilde longs exrraits de celle-ci ne doivent Ptre rmprrmds

, P

+vise reproduced WI thout the author's wr ~tten permission. oer autrement.reprodu~ts sans l'autwisatim &rite de I'auteur. 1 . - -

------ -- -- .- SIGNED/S~GM~ --

- - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - --

onTEo/DA,E * Y ftC%ql -- - - -- -

I f- -1 -- - - --.- ---

1 - 0 --

I 'd

L . l

- I+ -& LibaF/ o ~ ~ ~ a d a - -- -

e Cot-lections Development Branch --

Microfiche Service

NOTICE .b AVlS

- -. The quality of this' microkche i s heavily dependent La qualit6 de cette microfiche depend grandement de.

1 microfilming. Every effort has been made to ensure avons tout fait pour amurer une qualit6 supbrieure

I umn the quality of the original thesis submitted for la qualit4 de la these swmise au microfilmage. Nous

thehighest quai&of~ep~oductkmpossihle - - desspmduetiolr- - - --- - -- -

7 1 - If pages aFe hissing, contact the university which S'il manque des pages, veuillez communiquer

granted the degree. avec l'universit6 qui a mnf6rb le grade.

Some pages may have indistinct print especially La qualite d'impression de certaines pages peut if the original pages were typed with a poor typewriter kisser i desire& surtodt si les pages originales ont kt6

.. ribbon or i f the university sent us a poor photocopy. dactylographi6es i I'aide d'un ruban u d ou si I'univer- sit6 nous a fait parvenir une photocopie de mauvaise

.a qualite.

Previously copyrighted materials (journal articles, published tests, etc.) are not filmed.- - - - - -

Reproduction in full or in pari of this film' is gov- erned by the Canadian Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-30. Please read the authorization .forms which accompany this thesis.

d

Les documents qui font d6jd I'objet d'un droit d'au€eu~ (a~ticles fie rev&, e x m n s -I&, etc.) ne sont pas microfilm6s.

La reproduc 'on, m h e partielle, de ce microfilm est squmise B la \ oi canadienne. sur le droit d'auteur, SRC 1970, c. C-30. Veuilez- prendre connabnee des formules d'autorisation qui acmpagnent cette t h h .

THIS DISSERTATION LA THESE A ETE HAS BEEN ,MICROFILMED MICROFILM~E TELLE QUE EXACTLY AS R-ECElVED , NOUS L'AVONS RECUE

"

I N JUNIOR SECONDARY SCIENCE CLASSES

I

p r g a r e t D. C u s a c k

THE R~QUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

E R OF SCIENCE (EDUCATION)

1 i n t h e Faculty I

E d u c a t i o n

@ M a r g a r e t D. C u s a c k 1 9 7 9

SIMON F-ER UNIVERSITY

December 1979

A l l r i g h t s reserved. T h i s thesis m a y n o t be . reproduced i n w h o l e or i n p a r t , by photocopy or other means, w i t h o u t permission of t h e author.

I hereby gtmt to S i l p a Fr&rcr 'Urtivtrditp the rtght to Lend

my t b r f q or dirmtrtrrtioa (the t i t le of which i 8 rhovn be1ow)"to w a r ; i.

6 -

of thg Silrrcrrr Fresei Wvrrsity Library, and t o mab put i . 1 at r f ~ l e

coptea cmly forsuch urer8 or in respm8e t o 8 request f ro~ l the libtrty

behalf or for me of its urer8. I further agree that psrairr fm for

" mltiple copying of thiu thesir fur scholarly purpaeer MY ba ,

- - - /

- - - - - - - - - -- - -- i - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -

by m e or the b a n of Graduate Stodier. It i n undtrrtood t h t copyim

or publlcatt& of t h i s t b r t n far ftnaDcirl gain rb.ll)rrrot be all-d

Margaret D. Cusack N a m e :

Degree : Master of Science (Educat ion)

T i t l e of Thes is : Teaching P r a c t i c e s i n J u n i o r Secondary Science C l a s s e s

Examining Committee - - A L - - A - - - - >

Chairman : M. Manley-Casimir

M. Wideen Sen io r Supervisor

A.Whitney '

Second Member

r . -

A. Sherwood Third Member

J. W. T S o r g e Ivany Professor a n d Dean 05 Education - -! - - - --

Simon F r a s e r Univers i ty Ex te rna l " Examiner

---

d

D a t e approved z + - b s r 4! 1479,

ABSTRACT

Qecent r e s e a r c h i n sc ience educa t ion has been g r e a t l y d

in f luenced by P i a g e t ' s theory of i n t e l l e c t u a l development,

1 p a r t i c u l a r l y t h a t a s p e c t of t h e theory which r e l a t e s -. t o

t h e development of formal-opera t ional s t r u c t u r e s . This

s tudy focused on t each ing s t r a t e g i e s l i k e l y t o promote 4

formal-opera t ional reasoning p a t t e r n s i n a d o l e s c e n t s . From

t h e r e s e a r c h l i t e r a t u r e i n secondary s c i e n c e t each ing , t e n

t each ing p r a c t i c e s were i d e n t i f i e d which w e r e cons idered

l i k e l y t o promote t h e development of formal thought . S i x

o f t h e p r a c t i c e s r e l a t e d t o s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s and f o u r t o

t e a c h e r a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e classroom. An ins t rument was

then cons t ruc ted , based on t h e s e " s t r a t e g i e s , which employed

a modified s i g n system t o determine t h e frequency o f

occurrence of each o f t h e a c t i v i t i e s . Sc ience t each ing

was then observed and audio-taped i n 18 randomly s e l e c t e d

j u n i o r Seconda classrooms f o r a t o t a l of 5 2

l e s s o n s i n two i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Sub-

sequent coding enabled t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n

of p r e s e n t t each ing p r a c t i c e s being used by t h e t e a c h e r s i n

t h e sample. I n a d d i t i o n , it allowed t h e de te rmina t ion of

t h e e x t e n t t o which c u r r e n t t each ing p r a c t i c e s i n those - -

classrooms w e r e s i m i l a r t o t h o s e p r a c t i c e s cons idered l i k e l y

found t h a t jun io r secondary sc ience t each ing i n t h i s sample

iii

d i d not resemdre the ideal: pattern which

-

would

,

ezpec ted'

%-L. of f omzl rz- a mykeFV* . tfve of tesching, It w a s concluded t ha t the junior

secondary science teachers observed in this study were

either unaware of, or not interested in, promoting the

development .of s t u d e n t s ' reasoning patterns towards

formal-operational

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Approval

Abs t rac t

Table of Contents

L i s t of Tables

L i s t of F igures

I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

Context of t h e Problem

Statement of t h e Purpose I

S p e c i f i c Quest ions t o be Considered

L imi ta t ions of t h e Study

I1 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e ~ i t e r a t u r e Review

P i a g e t ' s Theory of I n t e l l e c t u a l Development

Ass imi la t ion and Accommodation

F a c t o r s Underlying I n t e l l e c t u a l Development

Mental Opera t ions o f t h e Stages

Concre te-opera t ional Reasoning P a t t e r n s

Formal-operat ional Reasoning P a t t e r n s

Cognit ive Levels of Secondary Science S tuden t s

Level of Cogni t ive Development and Achievement i n Science Classes

IQ and P i a g e t ' s S tages of Development

I

Page ! ,

ii J

! iii ?

A

v i i i i

v i i i

Page.

Teaching S t r a t e g i e s Employed i n a n Attempt t o Overcome D i f f e r e n c e s i n Cogn i t i ve Leve l o f S t u d e n t s i n Sc i ence C l a s s e s 38

T r a i n i n g S t u d i e s which Attempt t o Develop Forma l -ope ra t iona l Reasoning P a t t e m s 43

T r a i n i n g on S p e c i f i c P i a g e t i a n Tasks 43

T r a i n i n g t o I s o l a t e and C o n t r o l V a r i a b l e s ' 45 *

Long Term Teaching S t r a t e g i e s t o Promote I n t e l l e c t u a l ~ e v e f o p m e n t

Summary o f Teaching S t r a t e g i e s which Promote I n t e l l e c t u a l Development 6 3j

I11 METHOD AND PROCEDURES

The Sample

C o l l e c t i o n o f t h e Data

The Development o f t h e In s t rumen t 68

V a l i d i t y o f t h e In s t rumen t 73

The Coding Method Used on t h e I n s t r u m e n t 75

R e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e In s t rumen t 76

Method o f Analys ing t h e Data 77

Frequency of Occurrence of P i a g e t i a n - d e r i v e d A c t i v i t i e s 79

I V RESULTS 8 1

The Sample 81

Types of Teaching P r a c t i c e s I d e n t i f i e d in , t h e Sample 8 2

Page

Type I1

Type I11

Teaching Type by Grade Level

D i s t r i b u t i o n of Type and Grade Level by Teacher 87

Discussion of Means of ~ t u a e n t and Teacher - 9

A c t i v i t y I t e m s 90

•‹ Comparisqn of t h e Observed Teaching P r a c t i c e s

w i t h the Piaget-derived P r a c t i c e 90

V CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION 97

Conclusions 98

Discussion 100

V I APPEND1 CES

Appendix A - L e t t e r s of approval t o do r e s e a r c h i n t h e s e l e c t e d school d i s t r i c t s 103

Appendix B - Out l ines of purposes of t h e p r o j e c t 10 6

- F i n a l Form of Instrument used f o r Coding Science Lessons 110

J Appendix D - Schedule on which Teachers and Educators i n d i c a t e d I d e a l Amount o f T i m e which could be s p e n t on Piaget -der ived A c t i v i t i e s i n Science Lessons 113

Appendix E - Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n Graphs d' of bbserved Teaching P r a c t i c e s 116

V I I BIBLIOGRAPHY 122

v i i

LIST OF TABLES

Table

1. Concre te and Formal Reasoning P a t t e r n s 26 - I

2 . E a r l y and L a t e Concre te and Formal O p e r a t i o n s 27 . .

3 . P e r c e n t a g e s o f S t u d e n t s a t D i f f e r e n t P i a g e t i a n S t a g e s 31

4 . Sc i ence Teaching Obse rva t ion I n s t r u m e n t 7 l , 7 2 I t e m s

5 . C a l c u l a t i o n o f I t e m Sco res 77

6 . Exper ience of Teachers 82

7. Teaching Type by Grade Level 88

8 . D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Type and Grade Level by Teacher 89

9. Means o f S t u d e n t A c t i v i t y I t e m s by Teaching Type. 9 1

10. Means o f Teacher A c t i v i t y I t e m s by Teaching Type 94

LIST OF FIGURES

F i g u r e 1. Frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n s of a c t i v i t i e s i n s c i e n c e c lass rooms by t e a c h i n g s t y l e s 84 '

v i i i

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 6

Context o f t h e Problem

I n r e c e n t yea r s secondary and c o l l e g e s c i e n c e educa to r s

i n many c o u n t r i e s have been s i g n i f i c a n t l y in f luenced i n t h e i r @

t h i n k i n g by Jean P i a g e t ' s theory of i n t e l l e c t u a l development.

Herron (1975 'and 1978) , / ~ a r ~ l u s ~ (1977) , Lawson (1979) , Lowell

(1979) , McKinnon and Renner (1971) . ' ~ h a ~ f l 9 7 0 ) and Woll-

man and Karplus (1976) a r e among ave examiqed t h a t L

a s p e c t of t h e theory which d e a l s of

formal-opera t ional reasoning p a t t e r n s from concre te- -

o p e r a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s a s it p e r t a i n s t o s c i e n c e teaching.

I n a d d i t i o n , r e s e a r c h c a r r i e d o u t by Cantu and. Herron (1978) , case' and Fry (1973) , Goodstein and Howe (1978) and Sheehan

1

(1970) shows t h a t s t u d e n t s capable of o p e r a t i n g on ly a t t h e

l e v e l of concre te o p e r a t i o n s cannot s u c c e s s f u l l y l e a r n '

a b s t r a c t s c i e n c e concepts . They a l l cons ide r t h a t t h e s e more <

c & t p l e x reasoning p a t t e r n s t y p i c a l o f - t h e formal-opera t ional \

s t a g e a r e e s s e n t i a l f o r understanding and s u c c e s s f u l achieve-

ment of t o p i c s taw_ght i n u p p e r s e x o n d a y s c i e n c e - c ~ u r s e ~ . - ~

However, an examination of i n t e r n a t i o n a l s t u d i e s i n i . ' 4

which t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l development of ado lescen t s has been p J S d

assessed r e v e a l s t h a t a h igh percentage o f a d o l e s c e n t s and

young a d u l t s o p e r a t e a t t h e concre te -opera t iona l l e v e l . - C h i a p p e t t a ! ~ (1976) review of t e n such s t u d i e s c a r r i e d o u t

i n t h e United S t a t e s ; Shayer, Kuchemann and Wylam's (1976)

t e s t i n g of over t e n thousand s t u d e n t s i n t h e United Kingdom;

Karplus, Karplus, -Formisan0 and Paulsen ' s (1977) t e s t i n g of 't - s t u d e n t s i n seven c o u n t r i e s ; Han's (1977) work i n Korea; -

Lowell 's (1979) and Wheeler and Kass 's (1977) work i n Canada

a l l c o n s i s t e n t l y show t h a t t h e major i ty of s t u d e n t s i n grades 4

seven through twelve f u n c t i o n a t t h e concre te -opera t iona l , I

l e v e l . - >

E a r l i e r w r i t i n g s by P i a g e t ( I n h e l d e r and P i a g e t , 1958)

have implied t h a t many s t u d e n t s a t t a i n e d t h e s t a g e o,f formal-

opera t ions by 14-15 y e a r s . 13 view of s t u d i e s don& s i n c e

then , o u t s i d e G e n e v a , ' ~ i a g e t (1972) has s h i f t e d h i s p o s i t i o n

and now c o n s i d e r s , i n l i n e w i t h t h e i r f i n d i n g s , t h a t normal

s u b j e c t s may n o t a t t a i n t h e s t a g e of formal o p e r a t i o n s a n t i 1

between 15 and 20 yea r s .

This means then t h a t few s t u d e n t s i n j u n i o r secondary

schools a r e a t t h e formal-opera t ional s%age, b u t t h a t many'

a r e a t t h e age a t which they would be capab le <of developing '-4

toward t h a t s t a g e . This sugges t s a need t o r i n s t r u c t i o n 1

a t t h e jun io r secondary l a v e 1 which a t t empts t o promote

development of s t u d e n t s ' reasoning toward t h e more sophis-

t i c a t e d formal-opera t ional s t r u c t u r e s . S tuden t s who then

progress t e bideqy, chemistry and physics courses a t - s e n i o r -

hagh school l e v e l a t around 15-16 yea r s of age would possess /

-

-? I+

, t he necessary s t r u c t u r e s t o enable them t o i n t e r a c t w i G , and

understand, t h e fundamental a b s t r a c t concepts conta'ined i n *

P ; thos6 courses.

' Thus it i s ' a r g u e d t h a t t h e known l e v e l of development ' of s tudents e n t e r i n g se&or secondary c ience cou&& f a l l s 4 s h o r t of t h a t considered necessary f o r them to- f u l l y under-

s tand the -concepts presented a t t h a t l e v e l . - If is - for t h i s

reason t h a t sc ience educators such a s Arons (1976); %lake

and Nordland (1978) ; De Carcer, Gabel and Staver (1978,) ;

Lawson and Wollman (

consider t h a t t he de

1976) ; Renner (1978) ;

ve.lopment of formal- a t i o n a l reasoning 5 1

pa t t e rns should be one of the primary goals of sc ience teach-

ing i n secondary schools. Their pos i t i on , however, assumes

f i r s t t h a t what pccurs i n school doe5 enfiance the i n t e l l e c t u a l

development of t h e s tudent and second t h a t t h e r e a r e teaching d

prac t i ce s which can promote t he des i red development from

concrete-operational t o f o q a l - o p e r a t i o n a l functioning.

F r i o t ' s (1976) study i n d i c a t e s t h a t t he re a r e some school

experiences which do a s s i s t t he development of *concrete

operat ions t o formal operations.

, Piage t himself (1964) i s q u i t e s p e c i f i c &our t h e f a c t o r s

which b r ing about t he development of the s t r u c t u r e s of one -

s tage t o a higher s tage. Unt i l recen t ly , hawever, at tempts

t o implement h i s ideas have been r e s t r i c t e d t o t he pre-

primary and primary years. This trerid BramerB {1978, p.-287)

a t t r i b u t e s t o the d i f f i c u l t y and expense of experimenting a t

t he ~ u n i o r and sen io r high school l e v e l s and t o t h e i r

4

c u r r i c u l a t r a d i t i ~ n a l l y being less f l e x i b l e than i n th'e e a r l y 0 C

school yea r s . Never the less t h e f a c t o r s which P iage t -con-

s i d e r s b r i n g about i n t e l l e c t u a l development a r e t h e same f o r fi

a l l s t a g e s . x-

This ,being t h e c a s e , it was decided t h a t it would be

u s e f u l t o examine t h e s t u d i e s and development i n P i a g e t i y

o r i e n t e d r e s e a r c h i n s c i e n c e teaching, t o enumerate a l i s t of

- t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s which would be p r o f i t a b l e i n developing

formal-opera t ional s t r u c t u r e s i n ado lescen t s i n juniov secon-

dary sc ience c l a s s e s . A f u r t h e r s t e p could be t o cons ide r

c u r r e n t p r a c t i c e s i n t h e l i g h t of such t each ing s t r a t e g i e s .

s tatementPof t h e Purpose

One purpose of t h e s tudy then was t o i d e n t i f y from t h e

l i t e r a t u r e t h o s e t each ing p r a c t i c e s which a r e cons idered

l i k e l y t o l ead t o t h e development, i n j u n i o r secondary s tud-

e n t s , of formal-opera t ional s t r u c t u r e s from c m r e t e -

o p e r a t i o h a l reasoning p a t t e r n s . These p r a c t i c e s w e r e t o be

used t o form t h e b a s i s of an obse rva t ion schedule. A f u r -

t h e r purpose was t o use t h i s ins t rument ko i d e n t i f y c u r r e n t

t each ing p r a c t i c e s used by j u n i o r secondary s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s

i n two school d i s t r i c t s of B r i t i s h Columbia and t o determine

t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e i r teaching p r a c t i c e s w e r e sirnilax

t o t h e Piaget -der ived p r a c t i c e s .

- S p e c i f i c Q u e s t i o n s t o be Considered

/ What a r e t h e t each ing p r a c t i c e s cons idered by t h e

l i t e r a t u r e t o a i d t h e development o f formal-opera t ional

reasoning p a t t e r n s i n ado lescen t s?

What a r e t h e t each ing p r a c t i c e s c u r r e n t l y being used

by j u n i o r secondary sc ience t eachers?

To what e x t e n t a r e c u r r e n t teaching p r a c t i c e s i n

jun io r s&ondary sc ience c l a s s e s s i m i l a r t o those

cons idered i n

of formal-ope

t h e l i t e r a t u r e t o a i d t h e development

r a t i o n a l reasoning p a t t e r n s ?

A s has a l r eady been po in ted o u t e a r l i e r i n t h i s c h a p t e r ,

many sc ience educa to r s and t e a c h e r s , i n c l u d i n g t h e a u t h o r ,

cons ide r t h e development of t h e under ly ing s t r u c t u r e s of

formal thought t o be an impor tant goal o f t each ing sc ience

- i n secondary schools . I f t h e r e a r e some t each ing p r a c t i c e s

which a r e cons idered l i k e l y t o a s s i s t t h e s t u d e n t s ' develop-

ment toward t h a t d e s i r e d s t a g e of development, then it i s

impor tant t o know how s i m i l a r such p r a c t i c e s a r e t o c u r r e n t

teaching p r a c t i c e s i n jun io r secondary s c i e n c e c l a s s e s .

IE might be argued t h a t t h e type of teaching which

occurs i n secondary s c i e n c e classrooms i s a l r e a d y known o r ,

i f n o t , t h a t i t can e a s i l y be determined by asking t e a c h e r s

t o d e s c r i b e what t each ing s t r a t e g i e s they use. There i s ,

however, very l i t t l e r e c e n t documented evidence a v a i l a b l e

about sc ience classroom teaching p r a c t i c e s . Furthermore,

t eachers - u s u a l l y r e p o r t g r e a t e r v a r i a b i l i t y of a c t i v i t i e s

i n t h e i r classrooms than do s t u d e n t s i n the same classrooms

(Science Assessment Contrac t Team, 1978, p .39) . S t u d i e s

such a s those c a r r i e d o u t by Gallagher (1970) , and Medley

and Mi tze l (1963) , which employed sys temat ic obse rva t ions

of classroom behaviour were done some t i m e ago. A more re-

c e n t s tudy repor ted by Galton and Eggleston (1979) d i d

address t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f c o g n i t i v e behaviours i n secon-

dary sc ience classrooms b u t t h a t s tudy was c a r r i e d o u t i n

t h z United Kingdom. I t was t h e r e f o r e cons idered t h a t t o

determine a c c u r a t e l y what t each ing p r a c t i c e s c u r r e n t l y occur

i n jun io r secondary s c i e n c e classrooms it was e s s e n t i a l t o

d i r e c t l y observe t each ing i n those classrooms.

L imi ta t ions of t h e Study

Since t h e number of sc ience t e a c h e r s observed i n t h i s

s tudy was smal l , and s i n c e t h e sample was drawn from two

school d i s t r i c t s i n B r i t i s h Columbia, it i s n o t p o s s i b l e t o

g e n e r a l i z e t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e s tudy t o a wider popula t ion .

There was only l i m i t e d t i m e i n which t o develop t h e

ins t rument used f o r coding t h e t eacher and s t u d e n t a c t i v i -

t ies observed i n t h i s s tudy and t h e ins t rument se rved t h e

dua l purpose of determining p r e s e n t t each ing p r a c t i c e s and

comparing them w i t h i d e a l t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s . Both of t h e s e

f a c t o m may have l i m i t e d t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of c u r r e n t t each-

i n g p r a c t i c e s and t h e r e f o r e l i m i t t h e i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y of

t h e s tudy . I n a d d i t i o n , an i n h e r e n t l i m i t a t i o n i n any

o b s e r v a t i o n a l s t u d y of t h i s k ind i s t h e e f f e c t o f t h e p r e s -

ence o f o b s e r v e r s on r o u t i n e c lass room a c t i v i t i e s and

s t u d e n t - t e a c h e r i n t e r a c t i o n s .

CHAPTER I1

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Organizat ion of t h e L i t e r a t u r e Review

Since t h i s s tudy depends on an understanding of P i a g e t ' s

theory of i n t e l l e c t u a l development, p a r t i c u l a r l y those

a s p e c t s of t h e theory which a r e p e r t i n e n t t o concre te and

formal o p e r a t i o n s , then t h e p a r t s of t h e theory which d e a l

wi th t h e s e s t a g e s w i l l be reviewed and d i scussed i n s u f f i c i e n t

d e t a i l t o show how they a r e r e l a t e d t o t h e t each ing of secon-

dary sc ience courses .

The concre te -opera t iona l and formal-opera t ional s t a g e s

a r e considered t o be d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of develop-

ment. The mental opera t ions of each of t h e s e s t a g e s w i l l be

d iscussed t o show t h e l i m i t a t i o n s and c a p a b i l i t i e s of each i n

r e l a t i o n t o s c i e n c e s u b j e c t m a t e r i a l being p resen ted t o secon-

dary sc ience s t u d e n t s .

The c o g n i t i v e l e v e l s of s t u d e n t s a t t h e jun io r secondary

4 l e v e l , a l r e 9 y mentioned, w i l l be d i scussed i n more d e t a i l .

- Then s t u d e n t s ' achievements i n sc ience courses w i l l be viewed I

- i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e c o g n i t i v e l e v e l a t which they func t ion . - Course con ten t s and t h e i r c o g n i t i v e demands w i l l be r e l a t e d

t o t h e expected l e v e l s of s t u d e n t s t a k i n g t h e courses . Then

s t u d i e s i n which d i f f e r e n t teaching s t r a t e g i e s have been em-

ployed i n an a t tempt t o overcome d i f f e r e n c e s i n i n t e l l e c t u a l

l e v e l s of s t u d e n t s w i l l be reviewed. Since t h e s e a t t empts

show t h a t t h e r e a r e no s t r a t e g i e s y e t s t u d i e d which e l i m i n a t e '

t h e poorer achievements o f concre te -opera t iona l s t u d e n t s then C

ways of promoting development t o t h e formal-opera t ional s t a g e

w i l l be examined. The f i n a l s e c t i o n of t h e review w i l l iden-

t i f y teaching s t r a t e g i e s recommended t o encourage t h i s d e s i r e d

development. But f i r s t , t h e theory i t s e l f . -

P i a g e t ' s Theory of I n t e l l e c t u a l Development

P i a g e t ( I n h e l d e r & P i a g e t , 1958) cons ide r s t h a t t h e r e

a r e four major s t a g e s of c o g n i t i v e development through which

a l l i n d i v i d u a l s p rogress , i n t h e same i n v a r i a n t sequence: t h e

sensori-motor s t a g e which occurs from b i r t h t o about two yea rs

of age; t h e p re -opera t iona l s t a g e between about two and seven

yea r s ; t h e concre te -opera t iona l s t a g e between approximately

seven and e leven yea r s o r o l d e r , and t h e formal-opera t ional \ *

s t a g e which develops from around e leven y e a r s of age. A s men-

t i o n e d b e f o r e , P i a g e t now cons ide r s t h a t t h i s l a s t s t a g e is

a t t a i n e d i n normal s u b j e c t s " . . . i f n o t between 1 1 - 1 2 t o 14-15

yea r s , i n any c a s e between 15 and 2 0 yea r s" ( P i a g e t , 1972,

p. 1 0 ) .

Brainerd (1978) e x p l a i n s t h a t P i a g e t b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e r e

a r e a b s t r a c t o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p a t t e r n s , c a l l e d s t r u c t u r e s ,

which u n d e r l i e cogn i t ion and c o n t r o l i t . , -These s t r u c t u r e s , L

o r reasoning p a t t e r n s a s they a r e o f t e n c a l l e d by Karplus

e t a 1 (1977b) grow and change dur ing t h e course of an

i n d i v i d u a l ' s development. ~ a c h s t a g e i s governed by i t s

own unique set o f s t r u c t u r e s . The key d i f f e r e n c e s between

success ive s t a g e s a r e due t o q u a l i t a t i v e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n s of

s t r u c t u r e s . Renner and Lawson (1973) g i v e - a n e x c e l l e n t des-

c r i p t i o n of them: J

Mental s t r u c t u r e s r e p r e s e n t a more o r less t i g h t l y organized mental system t o guide behavior . During development of t h e human i n f a n t t o adulthood t h e s e s t r u c t u r e s must be b u i l t wi th in t h e b r a i n . A complete develop- ment sequence of s t r u c t u r e s i s n o t g e n e t i c a l l y given t o t h e c h i l d , they must be learned. According t o P i a g e t t h e b u i l d i n g o f t h e s e mental s t r u c t u r e s i s what u n d e r l i e s t h e process of i n t e l l e c t u a l development. (p.165)

Teaching, then, should be aimed a t developing new mental

s t r u c t u r e s i f it i s t o promote development from one s t a g e ,

t o another .

F l a v e l l (1963) p o i n t s o u t t h a t an e s s e n t i a l cha rac te r - . ) i s t i c of a s t a g e is t h a t t h e s t r u c t u r e s d e f i n i n g e a r l i e r 7 b1

s t a g e s become i n t e g r a t e d i n t o those of t h e fo l lowing s t a g e s .

The s t a g e ,of formal o p e r a t i o n s then i n c o r p o r a t e s c o g n i t i v e

, a c t i v i t i e s which a r e performed on t h e preceding concre te-

o p e r a t i o n a l s t a g e . H e f u r t h e r e x p l a i n s t h a t

a s t a g e has an i n i t i a l pe r iod o f p r e p a r a t i o n and a f i n a l pe r iod of achievement. The prep- a t o r y phase w i t h i t s f l u x and i n s t a b i l i t y

gradua l ly g i v e s way t o a l a t e r pe r iod i n which t h e s t r u c t u r e s i n q u e s t i o n form a ,

t i g h t l y k n i t , organized and s t a b l e whole. (p . 21)

S t r u c t u r e s c o n t r o l how and what w e t h i n k and guide

behavior . They a c t u a l l y r e p r e s e n t our knowledge. An educa-

t o r i n t e r e s t e d i n developing t h e s t r u c t u r e s o f a more advanced L.

s t a g e should be aware of t h e gradual development of new

s t r u c t u r e s and be prepared t o a l low s u f f i c i e n t t ime f o r

r e p e t i t i o n of new th ink ing p a t t e r n s . He should a l s o be a l e r t

t o t h e f a c t t h a t new s t r u c t u r e s a r e i n i t i a l l y u n s t a b l e and

t h e r e f o r e cannot always be used r e l i a b l y by a s t u d e n t . Some-

t i m e s newly developed reasoning p a t t e r n s w i l l be p u t i n t o

opera t ion s u c c e s s f u l l y ; a t o t h e r t i m e s t hey w i l l appear t o

be absent and t e a c h e r s should l e a r n t o expect t h i s incons i s -

t e n t i o r dur ing a s t u d e n t ' s development.

p r i n c i p a l , fundamental, and complementary charac te r -

i s t i c s of i n t e l l e c t u a l func t ion ing which P i a g e t cons ide r s

t o be i n v a r i a n t over t h e whole of a pe r son ' s developmental '

span a r e o r g a n i z a t i o n and adap ta t ion . The o r g a n i z a t i o n a l

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c can be i n f e r r e d from t h e f a c t t h a t i n t e l l i g e n t

behavior does n o t s e e m t o be a random t r i a l and e r r o r process.

The very young i n f a n t , f o r example, has a v a i l a b l e t h e s e p a r a t e

behav io ra l s t r u c t u r e s of e i t h e r looking a t o b j e c t s o r grasp-

i n g them. A f t e r a p e r i o d of development he combines t h e two

i n t o a h igher o r d e r s t r u c t u r e which enab les him t o g rasp

something whi le looking a t it. The coord ina t ion of t h e

p h y s i c a l p rocesses of t h e body i n t o an e f f i c i e n t system i s

a l s o considered t o be a r e s u l t of t h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n tendency.

The second g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e of func t ion ing i s adapta-

t i o n . A l l organisms a r e born w i t h a tendency t o adapt t o t h e

environment and man i s no except ion . According t o S i g e l

(1969, p.466) P i % g e t conceives of i n t e l l i g e n c e " . . . as an

adap ta t ion t o t h e s o c i a l and phys ica l environment." I n t e l -

l e c t u a l adap ta t ion is an i n t e r a c t i o n between a person and

t h e environment. F u r t h e r , adap ta t ion i s cons idered i n terms

of two complementary p rocesses : a s s i m i l a t i o n and accommoda-

t i o n . These two p rocesses w i l l be d iscussed i n some d e t a i l .

because it i s through them t h a t new s t r u c t u r e s develop.

Knowledge of 'such development i s of prime importan-ce t o t h i s

s tudy .

Ass imi la t ion and Accommodation

Qn t h e one hand, a person i n c o r p o r a t e s o r a s s i m i l a t e s L

incoming informat ion i n t o h i s p r e s e n t s t r u c t u r e s , whi le on

t h e o t h e r hand he modif ies o r changes, t h a t is , accommodates .

e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s i o enabre him t o make sense o u t of Tz tlY& f -

new information. I t i s c l e a r , then , t h a t t h e two p rocesses

a r e complementary. A person a s s i m i l a t e s an environmental - e v e n t i n t o a s t r u c k u r e whi le a t t h e 'same time he accommodates

) t h e s t r u c t u r e t o understand o r make sense o u t of t h a t event .

Thus accommodation i s involved i n developing -new and more com-

p l e x s t r u c t u r e s and theae s t r u c t u r e s determine a n d ' l i m i t

behavior .

When incoming informat ion i s wi th in t h e scope of an

i n d i v i d u a l ' s e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s i t i s a s s i m i l a t e d wi th very - i i t t l e ehange o r accommodation. I f , however, hew informat ion

i s too f a r above t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p r e s e n t l e v e l of development

any at tempted a s s i m i l a t i o n r e q u i r e s too.much change i n t h e

e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s and i t cannot be accommodated. P i a g e t

says t h i s -uses d i s e q u i l i b r i u m i n t h e e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s . I <>

N e w i n f o r ~ a t i o n w e l l w i t h i n t h e range of e x i s t i n g ' s t r u c t u r e s

i s e a s i l y a s s i m i l a t e d b u t s i n c e i t does n o t demand any accom-

modation, i t

or t h e

more complex

s e l e c t i o n of

does n o t promote any development.

t eacher wishing t o promote t h e development of

s t r u c t u r e s t h e r e a r e i m p l i c a t i o n s about t h e

m a t e r i a l t o be t augh t . New exper iences should

be chosen which a r e j u s t s u f f i c i e n t l y novel a s t o produce t h e

r i g h t amount of a s s i m i l a t i o n and accommodation t o enab le more

complex s t r u c t u r e s t o develop.

These complementary processes obviously p l a y a key

r o l e i n P i a g e t ' s exp lana t ion of i n t e l l e c t u a l development b o t

they a r e n o t t h e only f a c t o r s involved. Before cons ide r ing

them i n r e l a t i o n t o s c i e n c e t each ing p r a c t i c e s , t h e o t h e r

f a c t o r s w i l l be d i scussed .

F a c t o r s Underlying I n t e l l e c t u a l Development

Piaget (1964) l is ts f o u r main f a c t o r s which e x p l a i n t h e A

development of one set of s t r u c t u r e s from another: / -

- , \ F i r s t o f a l l matura t ion ... s i n c e t h i s developd ment i s a c o n t i n u a t i o n of embryo-genesis; second t h e r o l e of exper ience o f t h e e f f e c t s of t h e p h y s i c a l environment dn t h e s t r u c t u r e s of i n t e l l i g e n c e ; t h i r d , s o c i a l t ransmiss ion - i n t h e broad sense ; and f o u r t h , a f a c t o r which i s t o o o f t e n neglec ted b u t one which seems t q m e fundamental and even t h e p r in - c i p a l f a c t o r . I s h a l l c a l l t h i s f a c t o r , e q u i l i b r a t i o n , o r i f you p r e f e A i t , of s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n . (p.173) <

Since t h e concern of t h i s s tudy i s t h e development of

ado lescen t s ' reasoning p a t t e r n s towards formal-opera t ional 2

s t r u c t u r e s which w i l l enab le them t o understand a b s t r a c t

s c i e n c e concepts , then each of t h e four f a c t o r s mentioned

by P i a g e t w i l l be cons idered i n more d e t a i l i n r e f e r e n c e t o

s c i e n c e teaching.

Maturation

The i n t e l l e c t u a l c a p a c i t i e s of a young c h i l d a r e

obviously very d i f f e r e n t from those of an a d u l t . A s t h e ~,

b i a i n and c e n t r a l nervous system mature they m a k e . i t -\

I -. p o s s i b l e f o r the-chi ld t o us&hought and language. Gins-

burg and Opper (1979) cons ide r " t h e ques t ion is n o t whether

matura t ion has an e f f e c t , b u t how impor tant t h e r o l e of

matura t ion is and - how i t opera tes" (p .207) . I f matura t ion

w e r e t h e only f a c t o r involved, then t e a c h e r s would only

have t o w a i t f o r i t t o produce t h e requ i red development.

obvious ly o t h e r f a c t o r s have an e f f e c t b u t they a r e neces-

s a r i l y l i m i t e d by a s t u d e n t ' s l e v e l of matura t ion . .There

i s very l i t t l e a s c i e n c e t e a c h e r can do about t h e r o l e of

maturat ion except t o n o t e t h a t i t .may s e t some l i m i t a t i o n s - h

on - i n t e l l e c t u a l development.

P h y s i c a l Experiences

A second i n f l u e n c e on development is c o n t a c t wi th

t h e environment. By means of p h y s i c a l a c t i o n s such a s h Td- -4

l i n g o b j e c t s and manipulat ing them, a c h i l d e x t r a c t s from

t h e o b j e c t s themselves knowledge of t h e i r p h y s i c a l proper-

t ies. For example, weight i s experienced by l i f t i n g d i f f e r -

e n t o b j e c t s and shape, such a s t h e roundness o f a b a l l , , i s

understood by handl ing a b a l l . . These a r e p r n s i c a l exper- /I

i ences which involve t h e a s s i m i l a t i o n of new i d e a s i n t o

e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s . I n a d d i t i o n , new knowledge can be

gained by r e f l e c t i n g on t h e s e i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h m a t e r i a l s .

A c h i l d p lay ing wi th pebbles l e a r n s about t h e s i z e and ,ex-.,

\,weight and t e x t u r e of them b u t by cont inuing t o manipulate

\ hem, rea r range them and count them he e v e n t u a l l y l e a r n s I i

tQat t h e i r number i s t h e same no m a t t e r how th& a r e i

arranged, o r i n what o r d e r they a r e counted. This new

knowledge, gained by r e f l e c t i v e a b s t r a c t i o n of t h e c h i l d ' s

a c t i o n s , r e q u i r e s a logico-mathematical exper ience . P i a g e t d

d i s t i n g u i s h e s t h i s from pure ly phys ica l exper iences .

- S o c i a l Transmission - w x

I n a d d i t i o n t o matura t ion and p h y s i c a l exper iences

t h e r e - i s a t h i r d f a c t o r : s o c i a l o r i n g u i s t i c t ransmiss ion . \ -+% T h i s ' r e f e r s t o such t h i n g s a s a p a r e n t t e l l i n g a s t o r y t o

' a t c h i l d o r perhaps a t e a c h e r g iv in4 i n s t r u c t i o n s t o a c l a s s \I o r s t u q e n t s d i s c u s s i n g a ques t ion wi th t h e i r p e e r s . The -

c h i l d can l e a r n a mul t i tude of i d e a s i f they a r e passed on

i n t h i s way. A s Ginsburg and-'Opper p u t it, "Because of

s o c i a l t r ansmiss ion , t h e c h i l d need n o t r e - inven t every-

t h i n g f o r h imsel f" (p .211) . But it must be remembered t h a t @

j u s t l i s t e n i n g t o a conversa t ion w i l l n o t enab le t h e c h i l d

t o understand t h e t o p i c be ing d iscussed. H e must possess

t h e c o g n i t i v e s t r u c t u r & which enable him t o a s s i m i l a t e i t

before he can a p p r e c i a t e knowledge passed on by o t h e r

i n d i v i d u a l s . S o c i a l t r ansmiss ion i t s e l f i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t

t o produce c o g n i t i v e development b u t i t does a i d i n cog-

n i t i v e development. For t h i s reason, schoo l s and o t h e r

p l a c e s where v e r b a l i n t e r a c t i o n s and d i s c u s s i o n s a r e l i k e l y

t o occur o r a r e encouraged, such a s churches and c l u b s ,

c o n t r i b u t e t o i n t e l l e c t u a l growth b u t do n o t e n t i r e l y

determine it. . .

There i s ' a f o u r t h f 3 d t o r which i n t e g r a t e s t h e e f f e c t s ', *

?--' of t h e t h r e e j u s t d iscussed: e q u i l i b r a t i o n .

, E q u i l i b r a t i o n

-3 According t o P i a g e t t h i s i s a s e l f - r e g u l a t o r y . '

process and may be cons idered t o involve t h e fo l lowing

s t e p s . F i r s t , an i n d i v i d u a l has some given l e v e l of i n t e l -

l i g e n c e such a s t h e s t r u c t u r e s which make up t h e concre te-

o p e r a t i o n a l level"- of i n t e l l i g e n c e . The range of s i t u a t i o n s

demanding i n t e l l i g e n t behaviors whic.h t h e s e s t r u c t u r e s can ?

hanqle i s l i m i t e d . I f new informat ion is encountered which ! z L

c a l l s f o r i n t e l l i g e n t behavior beyond t h e i r scope then such i

encounters produce a s t a t e o f d i s e q u i l i b r i u m i n t h e s t r u c -

t u r e s . The s t r u c t u r e s must change and become more

i n t r i c a t e l y organized t o a l low t h i s informat ion , which i s

' c u r r e n t l y beyond t h e i r scope, to be as 's imilated. A new

l e v e l of s t r u c t u r e s r e s u l t s w h i c h - i s more complex, and

which i s cons idered more s t a b l e , because t h e r e w i l l be

fewer s i t u a t i o n s which w i l l subsequently throw them i n t o .- .$

disequ i l ib r ium 'because t h e i r scope has broadened.

This whole p rocess i s c a l l e d e q u i l i b r a t i o n o r

s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n and i s cons idered by P i a g e t t o be con-

s t a n t l y occur r ing between b i r t h and l a t e adolescence, a f t e r

which very l i t t l e broadening of s t r u c t u r e s 'is be l i eved t o

occur. The e q u i l i b r a t i ' o n process i s - t h e mechanism by which

t h e c h i l d moves from one s t a t e o f e q u i l i b r i u m t o t h e nex t , a '*

, t h a t is , from one s t a g e t o t h e next .

The s c i e n c e t e a c h e r i n t e r e s t e d i n encouraging f 1

i n t e l l e c t u a l development should provide s i t u a t i o n s which 3 , $

3 5T

P

-I

S 1

induce e q u i l i b r a t i o n i n s l tudents . New exper iences should I

be planned which a r e j u s t / beyond t h e s t u d e n t ' s p r e s e n t l e v e l

of reasoning. S tuden t s should then be encouraged t o i n t e r - 1

a c t wi th t h e new i d e a s and d i s c u s s them w i t h t h e i r t e a c h e r s

o r p e e r s u n t i l t hey e v e n t u a l l y accommodate them by apply-

i n g e f f e c t i v e new reasoning p a t t e r n s . I

When new problems' a r e f i r s t encountered, such a s

one involved i n working o u t \ t h e number of moles of a c i d I

req&red t o d i s s o l v e c e r t a i d weights of a me ta l , t hey

r e q u i r e the s t u d e n t t o i n t e r t r e l a t e e x i s t i n g reasoning

p a t t e r n s ( h e r e t h e i d e a s o f Qhe mole concept , concen t ra t ion

of s o l u t i o n s and s t o i c h i o m e t r l ) . The c a r r y i n g o u t of

v a r i o u s l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s us ing d i f f e r e n t volumes and

concen t ra t ions of a c i d wi th t h e same weight of t h e meta l

would provide p h y s i c a l exper ience o f t h e problem. Discus-

s i o n wi th t h e t e a c h e r o r o t h e r s t u d e n t s i n t h e c l a s s would

provide s o c i a l t r ansmiss ion of i d e a s r e l a t i n g t o t h e prob-

lem. The s t u d e n t who cannot immediately s o l v e t h e problem

should be allowed time t o r e f l e c t on h i s o b s e r v a t i o n s and

i f necessary r e s t r u c t u r e t h e t a s k i n r a n a t t empt t o s o l v e

it. I n t h i s way, he then comes t o r e a l i z e t h e shortcomings

of h i s p r e s e n t reasoning p a t t e r n s . Eventual ly , i f he can-

n o t r each t h e c o r r e c t answer by h imsel f , h i s t e a c h e r o r h i s

p e e r s may have t o provide it f o r him.

Having c o r r e c t l y worked through t h e problem once,

t h e s t u d e n t should r e p e a t s i m i l a r a c t i v i t i e s t o make s u r e

r e g u l a t i o n t o f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h t h e newly developed reason-

i n g p a t t e r n s . Karplus e t a 1 (1977b) emphasize t h a t t h i s

r e p e t i t i o n i s necessary t o enab le t h e new s t r u c t u r e s t o

. become f u l l y i n t e g r a t e d wiW t h e o l d t o produce a new

equ i l ib r ium. They a l s o i n s i s t t h a t an e s s e n t i a l p a r t of

t h e p rocess i s t o provide s i t u a t i o n s i n which t h e s t u d e n t

i n i t i a l l y has t i m e t o t r y t o work o u t new problems by him-

s e l f . I f he cannot , then he is aware>of t h e inadequacy of

h i s reasoning, and ready t o a l t e r h i s e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s .

This approach assumes t h a t t h e s t u d e n t has had previous

exper ience w i t h t h e b a s i c i d e a s needed t o s o l v e t h e new

problems, o therwise t h e whole e x e r c i s e i s f a r t o o d i f f i c u l t

and t h e new reasoning p a t t e r n s t o o f a r above e x i s t i n g ones

t o al low i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h it.

The i d e a of inducing e q u i l i b r a t i o n w i l l be re-

f e r r e d t o again when s p e c i f i c teaching s t r a t e g i e s t o promote

formal thought a r e be ing considered. Before t h a t i s done,

however, t h e r e a r e some o t h e r a s p e c t s of t h e theory and

r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e t o be d iscussed. They i n c l u d e , f i r s t of

a l l , a more d e t a i l e d look a t t h e mental o p e r a t i o n s of t h e -

concre te -opera t iona l and formal-operat ional s t a g e s i n terms

of secondary s c i e n c e s u b j e c t ma t t e r .

P

Mental Operat ions of t h e Stages

Concre te-opera t ional Reasoning P a t t e r n s

Concrete opera t ions a r e based on t h e l o g i c of c l a s s e s

and t h e l o g i c of r e l a t i o n s . C l a s s i f i c a t i o n invo lves t h e

a b i l i t y t o s e t up c l a s s e s and h i e r a r c h i e s of c l a s s e s . This

i n t u r n involves, t h e a b i l i t y t o use t h e opera t ions of addi-

t i o n , s u b t r a c t i o n , and m u l t i p l i c a t i o n i n d e a l i n g wi th -,

c l a s s e s . For example, c h i l d r e n a t t h i s s t a g e would recog-

n i z e t h a t t h e c l a s s o f a l l c h i l d r e n i s made up of t h e sum of

boys and g i r l s . I n t h e same way, t h e numder of boysi could

be found by s u b t r a c t i n g t h e numberb of g i r l s from t h e t o t a l

number of c h i l d r e n . P re -opera t iona l c h i l d r e n do n o t recog-

n i z e these r e l a t i o n s h i p s because they do n o t possess rever-c

s i b i l i t y which i s e s s e n t i a l f o r t h i s type of reasoning.

They can only d e a l wi th t h e p a r t s , o r t h e whole c l a s s , b u t

cannot make g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s about both.

The opera t ion of s e r i a t i o n a l s o develops dur ing t h e

pe r iod of concre te opera t ions . For example, a t t h i s s t a g e

a c h i l d can p u t s t i c k s of d i f f e r e n t l eng ths i n o r d e r of

i n c r e a s i n g l eng th , wi thout n e c e s s a r i l y s t a r t i n g wi th t h e

s h o r t e s t o r t h e longes t . The c h i l d n o t only recognizes some

s t i c k s a r e l o n g e r , he a l s o recognizes some a r e s h o r t e r than

o t h e r s and he can p rogress from any s t i c k w i t h which he

s t a r t s . Again t h e process involves r e v e r s i b i l i t y .

Another concre te opera t ion t h a t has been widely i n v e s t i -

g&ed is t h a t of conservat ion . Children a t t h i s s t a g e

recognize t h a t two corresponding rows of t e n e q u a l l y spaced

o b j e c t s have t h e same number of o b j e c t s . I f one row i s then

sp read o u t , t h e c h i l d who can "conserve" w i l l recognize

t h a t they s t i l l both have t h e same number of o b j e c t s . P r i o r

t o t h e concre te pe r iod c h i l d r e n w i l l c la im t h a t t h e longer

row has more o b j e c t s .

I n a d d i t i o n , c h i l d r e n a t t h i s s t a g e can conserve mass.

They recognize t h a t no m a t t e r what shape a p i e c e of p l a s t i -

c i n e i s made t o assume, it w i l l always have t h e same amount

of substance i n i t i f noth ing i s added o r taken away. Brain-

e r d (1978) and Neimark (1975) cons ide r t h a t t h e h o s t of

r e p l i c a t i o n s t u d i e s done i n t h e a r e a of conservat ion show

t h a t c h i l d r e n a c q u i r e conservat ion of mass, then weight and

then, some two yea rs l a t e r ( i n t h e formal-opera t ional s t a g e ) ,

they conserve volume.

Children a t t h e s t a g e o f concre te opera t ions possess

f e v e r s i b i l i t y , and conserve mass and weight. The concre te

o p e r a t i o n s they possess a r e based on t h e l o g i c of c l a s s e s

and t h e l o g i c of r e l a t i o n s . Using t h e s e o p e r a t i o n s they a r e

a b l e t o d e a l w i t h r e a l i t y , t h a t is , concre te o b j e c t s .

S i g e l and Cocking (1977) summarize t h e a b i l i t i e s a t t h i s

s t a g e by saying:

I n t h e concre te o p e r a t i o n a l pe r iod t h e c h i l d t h i n k s i n o p e r a t i o n s b u t i s t i e d t o the observable and needs props t o work wi th . The c h i l d i s a b l e t o t h i n k i n terms of c l a s s e s , r e l a t i o n s and number. To be a b l e t o do t h i s he has t o be a b l e t o under- s t and r e v e r s i b i l i t y and conservat ion . (p.65)

Since t h e s t u d e n t a t t h i s s t a g e can only employ t h e

opera t ions i n t h e presence of concre te o b j e c t s o r d i r e c t l y

observable p r o p e r t i e s , h i s reasoning and problem so lv ing

s t i l l have many l i m i t a t i o n s . He cannot y e t d e a l wi th poten-

t i a l a c t i o n s , a b s t r a c t i d e a s o r t h e o r i e s . A s Cantu and

Herron (1978) , Har t fo rd and Good (1976), and Goodstein and

Howe (1978) p o i n t o u t , t h i s means t h a t such s c i e n c e t o p i c s

a s t h e k i n e t i c theory , t h e law of cons tan t composition and

atomic theory a r e c u r r e n t l y beyond h i s scope.

Formal-operat ional Reasoning P a t t e r n s

Once t h e s t u d e n t develops t h e s t r u c t u r e s of t h e formal-

o p e r a t i o n a l s t a g e , however, h i s th ink ing processes a r e

e n t i r e l y a b s t r a c t . Verbal s ta tements may be s u b s t i t u t e d f o r

o b j e c t s and a new type of th ink ing , p r o p d s i t i o n a l l o g i c ,

opera tes . The s t u d e n t ' s th ink ing i s no longer t i e d t o

r e a l i t y ; he can d e a l wi th h y p o t h e t i c a l p r 6 p o s i t i o n s .

An ado lescen t who possesses t h e reasoning p a t t e r n s of

formal thought approaches problems and o b s e r v a t i o n s i n a

sys temat ic way. I n t h e course of experimental manipulat ions

i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y , any observed outcomes a r e cons idered a s

be ing on ly a p a r t of a whole range of p o s s i b l e occurrences. - -

That some outcomes do n o t occurenab les t h e formal s t u d e n t t o

i s o l a t e t h e f a c t o r s which might p reven t them from occur r ing

and y e t a l low o t h e r s . The formal ado lescen t , then , i s a b l e

t o th ink i n terms of a l l p o s s i b l e combinations, "whether

t h e s e combinat ions arise i n r e l a t i o n t o e x p e r i m e n t a l prob-

l e m s o r p u r e l y v e r b a l q u e s t i o n s " ( I n h e l d e r & P i a g e t , 1958,

p . 2 5 3 ) .

This c o m b i n a t o r i a l system which i s developed e n a b l e s

him t o see r e a l i t y a s o n l y one of many p o s s i b i l i t i e s . Con-

crete s t r u c t u r e s do n o t a l l o w t h i s t ype of r ea son ing . C

While t h e a b i l i t y t o t h i n k i n t e r m s o f a l l p o s s i b l e

combina t ions i s cons ide red by P i a g e t t o be t h e fundamental

d i f f e r e n c e between t h e fo rma l s t a g e and t h e c o n c r e t e s t a g e ,

, t h e r e a r e o t h e r menta l o p e r a t i o n s which he c o n s i d e r s a r e

developed c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h t h i s s t r u c t u r e . One is t h e

a b i l i t y t o ho ld a l l f a c t o r s c o n s t a n t i n an expe r imen t b u t

t h e one under i n v e s t i g a t i o n . P i a g e t views t h i s a s a n o t h e r

outcome o f t h e a d o l e s c e n t ' s a b i l i t y t o hand le a l l t h e s i x -

t e e n b i n a r y o p e r a t i o n s of p r o p o s i t i o n a l l o g i c .

The o t h e r o p e r a t i o n s which t h e formal a d o l e s c e n t

p o s s e s s e s a r e r e f e r r e d t o a s fo rma l -ope ra t iona l schemes and

a r e c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e fo rmula t ion o f s c i e n t i f i c laws

and t h e e x t r a c t i o n of f u n c t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s by which t h e y

a r e ma thema t i ca l ly i n t e r p r e t e d . They are t h e o p e r a t i o n s of * )

p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y , p r o b a b i l i t y , a n d c o r r e l a t i o n a l t h i n k i n g .

Both p r o p o s i t i o n a l - o p e r a t i o n s and fo rma l -ope ra t iona l schemes

a r e cons ide red by P i a g e t t o deve lop i n synchrony d u r i n g

ado le scence . Accord ingly , a formal s t u d e n t can be r ecogn ized by t h e

way he approaches new problems. F l a v e l l (1977) d e s c r i b e s

it i n t h e f o l l o w i n g way:

The f o r m a l - o p e r a t i o n a l t h i n k e r i n s p e c t s t h e problem d a t a , h y p o t h e s i z e s t h a t such and such a t h e o r y o r e x p l a n a t i o n might be t h e c o r r e c t o n e , deduces from it t h a t s o and s o e m p i r i c a l phenomena ought l o g i c a l l y t o o c c u r o r n o t o c c u r i n r e a l i t y and t h e n tests h i s t h e o r y by s e e i n g i f t h e s e p re - d i c t e d phenomena do i n f a c t occu r . (p .103)

Tha t i s , t h e t e a c h e r can e x p e c t t h e s t u d e n t t o b e a b l e t o

u se hypo the t i co -deduc t ive r ea son ing .

I n more g e n e r a l t e rms , t h e a d o l e s c e n t who i s a formal

t h i n k e r can b e e x p e c t e d t o engage i n a v a r i e t y o f - f o r m s of

t hough t which would be i m p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t t h e combina t iona l

sys tem ( t h e s i x t e e n b i n a r y l o g i c a l o p e r a t i o n s ) o r some

l o g i c a l e q u i v a l e n t o f it. Ginsburg and Opper (1979) des-

c r i b e t h e formal o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t a s one who makes r e a l i t y

secondary t o p o s s i b i l i t y , who can imagine t h a t many t h i n g s

might occu r and t h a t many i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f d a t a might be

f e a s i b l e . The a d o l e s c e n t ' s t hough t is hypo the t i co -deduc t ive ,

he can c o n s i d e r a l l p o s s i b l e combina t ions and h e can d e a l

w i t h p r o p o s i t i o n s a s w e l l a s o b j e c t s . H i s t hough t i s f l e x -

i b l e and v e r s a t i l e and h e i s capab le o f d e a l i n g w i t h prob-

l e m s i n many ways from a v a r i e t y of p e r s p e c t i v e s .

The formal s t a g e a p p e a r s t o d i f f e r appre- c i a b l y and s i g n i f i c a n t l y from t h e e a r l i e r P i a g e t i a n s t a g e s . F u l l development a p p e a r s t o be v e r y much t h e r u l e a t e a r l i e r s t a g e s b u t appea r s t o be t h e e x c e p t i o n a t t h i s s t a g e . ( D u l i t , 1972, p .297)

Between t h e c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l s t a g e and t h e f u l l y

developed formal s t a g e P i a g e t c o n s i d e r s t h a t t h e r e i s a

l e n g t h y phase of p r e p a r a t i o n d u r i n g which t h e a d o l e s c e n t may

sometimes g i v e ev idence o f u s i n g formal s t r u c t u r e s b u t a t

o t h e r s r e v e r t t o u s i n g o n l y c o n c r e t e s t r u c t u r e s . I t i s a

s t a g e i n which t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s s t r u c t u r e s a r e i n d i s e q u i l -

i b r ium and i s r e f e r r e d t o a s t h e t r a n s i t i o n a l o r fo rmal

s t a g e I11 A. Teachers can e x p e c t s t u d e n t s a t t h i s l e v e l t o

o c c a s i o n a l l y b u t n o t r e l i a b l y app ly formal r e a s o n i n g t o t h e i r

problem s o l v i n g b u t even t h e o c c a s i o n a l u s e s h o u l d be Laken

a s ev idence t h a t t h e y a r e deve lop ing towards t h e d e s i r e d

f i n a l s t a g e .

O f d i r e c t concern t o t h i s s t u d y i s how t h e s t a g e s of

development r e l a t e t o t h e c o n t e n t s o f a s c i e n c e c o u r s e .

What s c i e n t i f i c c o n c e p t s do c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l and formal-

o p e r a t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s e n a b l e a s t u d e n t t o a s s imi -

late?

Karplus and h i s co-workers a t Be rke l ey , C a l i f o r n i a

have p u b l i s h e d a summary o f t h e r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s t h e y

e x p e c t s t u d e n t s a t e a c h s t a g e t o be c a p a b l e of u s ing . The

summary, reproduced i n Table 1, i s u s e f u l because it r e l a t e s

e a c h men ta l o p e r a t i o n t o a p a r t i c u l a r s c i e n c e t o p i c o r g i v e s

a s c i e n c e c o u r s e c o n t e n t which a s t u d e n t u s i n g t h a t opera-

t i o n cou ld unde r s t and .

Another summary i s p rov ided i n Table 2 , which was pre -

pa red by Love11 (1979) working i n t h e Uni ted Kingdom. I t

Table 1

Conc re t e and Formal Reasoning P a t t e r n s

Examples o f Concrete Reasoning P a t t e r n s

Class I n c l u s i o n - c l a s s i f y i n g and g e n e r a l i z i n g based on observ- a b l e p r o p e r t i e s ( e - g . , d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c o n s i s t e n t l y between a c i d s and bases accord ing t o t h e c o l o r o f l i t m u s paper ; recog- n i z i n g t h a t a l l dogs a r e animals b u t t h a t no t a l l animals a r e dogs) . Conservat ion - r e a l i z i n g t h a t a q u a n t i t y remains t h e same i f no th ing is added o r taken away, though it may appear d i f f e r e n t ( e - g . , when a l l t h e wate r i n a beaker is poured i n t o an empty gradua ted c y l i n d e r , t h e amount o r i g i n a l l y i n t h e beaker is e q u a l t o t h e amount f i n a l l y i n t h e c y l i n d e r ) .

S e r i a l Orderin - ar ranging a s e t o f o b j e c t s accord ing t o an observab le p r o & r t y and p o s s i b l y e s t a b l i s h i n g a one-to-one correspondence between two observab le s e t s ( e - g . , smal l animals have a f a s t h e a r t b e a t whi le l a r g e animals have a slow h e a r t b e a t ) .

R e v e r s i b i l i t y - menta l ly i n v e r t i n g a sequence o f s t e p s t o r e t u r n from t h e f i n a l c o n d i t i o n of a c e r t a i n procedure t o i t s i n i t i a l c o n d i t i o n ( a f t e r being shown t h e way t o walk from home t o school , f i n d i n g t h e way home wi thout a s s i s t a n c e ) .

Examples of Formal Reasoning P a t t e r n s

T h e o r e t i c a l Reasoning - applying m u l t i p l e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , con- s e r v a t i o n l o g i c , s e r i a l o r d e r i n g , and o t h e r reasoning p a t t e r n s t o r e l a t i o n s h i p s and p r o p e r t i e s t h a t a r e n o t d i r e c t l y observab le (e .g . , d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between o x i d a t i o n and r e d u c t i o n r e a c t i o n s , us ing t h e energy conserva t ion p r i n c i p l e , a r r a n g i n g lower and h i g h e r p l a n t s i n an e v o l u t i o n a r y sequence, making i n f e r e n c e s from t h e theory accord ing t o which t h e e a r t h ' s c r u s t c o n s i s t s of r i g i d p l a t e s , a c c e p t i n g a hypothes i s f o r t h e sake of argument)

Combinatorial Reasonin - c o n s i d e r i n g a l l conce ivab le combinat ions of t a n g i b l e o r a b s t r a c z i t ems (e .g. , s y s t e m a t i c a l l y enumerat ing t h e genotypes and phenotypes w i t h r e s p e c t t o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s governed by two o r more g e n e s ) .

F u n c t i o n a l i t y and P r o p o r t i o n a l Reasonin - s t a t i n g and i n t e r p r e t - i n g f u n c t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n mathemazical form (e .g . , t h e r a t e of d i f f u s i o n o f a molecule is i n v e r s e l y p r o p o r t i o n a l t o t h e square r o o t o f i t s molecular weigh t ) .

Cont ro l o f V a r i a b l e s - recogniz ing t h e n e c e s s i t y of an experimen- t a l des ign t h a t c o n t r o l s a l l v a r i a b l e s b u t t h e one be ing i n v e s t i - ga ted ( e - g . , i n t h e Mealworm Puzz le , recogniz ing t h e inadequacy of t h e s e t u p us ing Box 1).

P r o b a b i l i s t i c and C o r r e l a t i o n a l ~ e a s o n i n ~ - i n t e r p r e t i n g observa- t i o n s t h a t show u n p r e d i c t a b l e v a r i a b i l i t y and recogniz ing r e l a - t i o n s h i p s among v a r i a b l e s i n s p i t e o f random f l u c t u a t i o n s t h a t mask them ( e . g , , i n t h e Mealworm Puzz le , recogniz ing t h a t a 1

smal l number o f specimen showing e x c e p t i o n a l behavior need n o t . i n v a l i d a t e t h e p r i n c i p a l c o n c l u s i o n ) .

Note: From Karp lus , R . , Lawson, A.E. , Wollman, W . , Appel , M . , B e r n o f f , R . , Howe, A . , Rusch, J . J . , and S u l l i v a n , F. S c i e n c e t e a c h i n g and t h e development o f r e a s o n i n g . Lawrence H a l l o f S c i e n c e , 1977.

\ \ 3 T a b l e 2 ._

E a r l y a n d L a t e C o n c r e t e and Formal O p e r a t i o n s '

Ear ly concre te opexat ions .

The p u p i l w i l l i n v e s t i g a t e what happens i n a haphazard way - - w i l l argue = a t " t h i s goes w i t h t h a t " ( a s s o c i a t i o n only)

- w i l l o r d e r a s&e$ (e.g. l eng ths o r weights) b u t i s unablg,to, do s o ah part of a per;ception of a r e l a t i o n - s h i p In i n v e s t i g a t i o n - '* . -.

c . - - - 'is unable t o use any model a s theory.

Late concre te opera t ions

- w i l l f i n d ' o u t what happens, inc lud ing t h e use of ' s e r i a t i o n and c l ~ ? s s i f i c a t i o n a s t o o l s of perception

I ; - can use o rder ing r e l a t i o n s t o p a r t i a l l y q u a n t i f y a s s o c i a t i v e reasoning, e:g. "as t h i s goes up t h a t goes down," " i f you double t h s you must double t h a t "

- can use se fha t ion and t h e m u l t i p l i c a t i o n of two s e r i a t i o n s a s pe rcep tua l s t r a t e g i e s

- understands the r u l e s of a simple model bu t n o t i n r e l a t i o n t o the experiment a t hand.

Ear ly formal opera t ions

The p u p i l w i l l show more i n t e r e s t i n looking f o r why.

- s e e t h e p o i n t of making i t s i m p l i f i e d t o one v a r i a b l e , b u t cannot perform the s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s y s t e m a t i c a l l y himseLf

- be a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h causa t ive n e c e s s i t y

- use o r perceive met r i c proport ion i n a concrete. s i t u a t i o n

3, * *b*A=+p - make simple deductions from a model i f the use of the

l a t t e r i s explained. < <

Late formal opera t ions

- have an i n t e r e s t i n checking a "why" s o l u t i o n

- know t h a t in a system of s e v e r a l v a r i a b l e s he must "hold a l l o t h e r th ings equal" whi le i n v e s t i g a t i n g one v a r i a b l e a t a time

- formulate genera l o r a b s t r a c t r e l a t i o n s

- use d i r e c t and inverse p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y f o r pe rce iv ing and formulat ing r e l a t i o n s h i p s

- a c t i v e l y sea rch f o r an explanatory model o r extend one t h a t is given.

No te : 'From L o v e l l , K . I n t e l l e c t u a l g r o w t h and t h e s c h o o l cur- r i c u l u m . I n F .B . Murray , The impact o f P i a g e t i a n t h e o r y . U n i v e r s i t y P a r k P r e s s , 1979.

I i s inc luded because , u n l i k e t h e Karp lus one , i t l i s t s t h e

per at ions which a s t u d e n t is cons ide red t o p o s s e s s d u r i n g

t h e e a r l y d r p r e p a r a t i o n a l phase o f e a c h s t a g e a s w e l l a s

d u r i n g t h e f u l l y developed phase. The o p e r a t i o n s l i s t e d on

t h i s t a b l e a r e w r i t t e n i n more g e n e r a l t e n s t h a n t h o s e i n

Table 1 and a r e t h e r e f o r e perhaps l e s s u s e f u l f o r working o u t

t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e s t a g e s t o t h e c o n t e n t s of a secondary

s c i e n c e cou r se . t

The t a b l e does , howeve , prov ide g u i d e l i n e s f o r t e a c h e r s

who a r e i n t e r e s t e d i n t r y i n g t o de te rmine from t h e t h i n k i n g

behav io r of t h e i r s t u d e n t s t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l s t a g e t o which

they have developed. For example, i f a t e a c h e r r e c o g n i z e s

t h a t a s t u d e n t s e e s '@he n e c e s s i t y , when i n v e s t i g a t i n g a

system of s e v e r a l v a r i a b l e s , " t o hold a l l o t h e r t h i n g s ,

equa l " wh i l e i n v e s t i g a t i n g one v a r i a b l e a t a t i m e , t hen t h e

s t u d e n t i s a t t h e l a t e formal itage. Tha t s t u d e n t should

a l s o be a b l e t o fo rmula t e geners l o r a b s t r a c t r e l a t i o n s and

be a b l e t o use d i r e c t and i n v e r s e p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y .

The t h i n k i n g p a t t e r n s used by s t u d e n t s i n s c i e n c e

l e s s o n s can g i v e t e a c h e r s an i n s i g h t i n t o t h e developmental

s t a g e of t h e s t u d e n t s . A g e n e r a l i d e a o f t h e ' c o g n i t i v e

s t a g e t o be expec ted can a l s o be ga ined from t h e ages and

g rade l e v e l of t h e s t u d e n t s . This f o l l o w s from t h e r e s u l t s

o f s t u d i e s done by s c i e n c e e d u c a t o r s i n which P i a g e t i a n

s t a g e h a s been de te rmined . Some of t h e s e s t u d i e s w i l l now

be d i scussed .

Cognit ive Levels of Secondary Science S tuden t s

Severa l s t u d i e s have been done i n a l l p a r t s of t h e

world t o determine t h e ages a t which ado lescen t s a t t a i n fo r -

mal thought o r a l t e r n a t i v e l y t o determine t h e sta9e.s t o

which s t u d e n t s i n h igh schoo l s haVe_aeveloped. I n i t i a l l y

I n h e l d e r and P i a g e t

t h e o n s e t of formal

y e a r s and was f u l l y

Correspondence wi th

(1958) l e d i n v e s t i g a t o r s t o b e l i e v e t h a t

o p e r a t i o n s occurred a s e a r l y a s e leven

developed by around f i f t e e n y e a r s of age.

I n h e l d e r by D u l i t i n 1972 makes it c l e a r

t h a t only those s u b j e c t s i n t h e 11 t o 15-year-old group who

d i d d i s p l a y formal thought were repor ted i n t h a t r e f e r e n c e ,

and they came from t h e b e t t d s c h o o l s o f Geneva. More

r e c e n t s t u d i e s make it c l e a r t h a t development t o t h e formal-

o p e r a t i o n a l s t a g e , once expected t o have occurred i n t h e

e a r l y secondary y e a r s , should n o t be expected u n t i l much

l a t e r . 4.

S ince formal o p e r a t i o n s a r e complex and c o n s i s t of

s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t reasoning p a t t e r n s , then only those ,

s t u d i e s which have employed t h r e e o r more Piaget ian- type

t a s k s t o determine s t a g e l e v e l w i l l be d i scussed here .

A s Bady (1978) p o i n t s o u t , " I t i s meaningless t o c la im t h a t

a s p e c i f i c percentage of t h e popula t ion i s formal o r con-

c r e t e kased on t h e r e s u l t s of a t a s k o r two. The s t r u c t u r e

of formal o p e r a t i o n s i s more complex than t h a t . . . " (p.238)

A s d i scussed i n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h i s s tudy ,

Chiappet ta (1976) reviewed seven s t u d i e s c a r r i e d o u t i n t h e

United Skates i n which t h e c o g n i t i v e l e v e l of h igh school

s t u d e n t s was determined. The r e s u l t s of t h e s e s t u d i e s

t o g e t h e r wi th s e v e r a l b o t h e r s a r e summarized i n Table 3 .

They show t h a t between 77 and 83 c e n t of j u n i o r high

school s t u d e n t s w e r e found t o be a t t h e concre te -opera t iona l

l e v e l . Between 4 1 and 86 p e r c e n t of s e n i o r h igh school ,'

u s t u d e n t s were a l s o found t o be concre te . I t should be noted ,

however, t h a t t h e l a t t e r very h igh percentage was repor fed

by Nordland, Lawson and Kahle (1974) who c a r r i e d o u t t h e i r

t e s t i n g i n a disadvantaged urban h igh school . A

B l a s i and Hoeffe l (1974) p resen ted a t a b l e of t h e per-

centage inc idence of formal-opera t ional thought a c r o s s

d i f f e r e n t ages , a s found by va r ious r e s e a r c h e r s , and con-

cluded t h a t a l a r g e percentage of i n d i v i d u a l s of normal

i n t e l l i g e n c e and average s o c i a l background d i d n o t seem t o

func t ion a t t h e formal-opera t ional l e v e l i n adu l thood 'nor

i n adolescence.

If one focuses on on ly those s t u d i e s which a r e con-< ;

cerned with j u n i o r secondary s t u d e n t s , a s p resen ted i n -

Table 3 , then t h e percentage who a r e f u l l y formal-opera t ional

i s q u i t e small .

For example, F r i o t (1976) ,working i n t h e United S t a t e s

found 6 p e r c e n t of a . sample of 210 grade e i g h t and n i n e .

s c i e n c e s t u d e n t s t o be f u l l y farmal . Han ( l 9 7 7 ) , working

i n Korea wi th grade n ine s t u d e n t s , found 0 p e r c e n t t o be

f u l l y formal whi le 22 p e r c e n t w e r e e a r l y formal-opera t ional .

) 1 T a b l e 3 .c

I"

' /

r,. P e r c e n t a g e s of S t u d e n t s a t D i f f e r e n t

P i a g e t i a n S t a g e s

P i a g e t i a n S t a g e ,

G r a d e , Con. T r . - Form. S t u d y - N L e v e 1 % % %

F r i o t ( 1 9 7 6 ) 210 8 , 9 P r e 8 2 - 6

P o s t 44 - 40 I

Han - ( 1 9 7 7 ) 1 2 7 , 9 7 8 22 0 - : L

Lawson ( 1 9 7 4 ) 1 0 1 1 1 , 1 2

5 1 B i o l 6 4 . 8 - 35.2

5 0 Chem 22 - 78

L o w e l l ( 1 9 7 9 ) 5 0 7 , 8 8 8 . 5 11.; 0

6 2 9-11 7 0 1 6 . 7 1 3 . 3

Nord l and ,Lawson 96 7 83 .4 - 1 5 . 6 & K a h l e ( 1 9 7 4 )

506 1 1 , 1 2 85 .6 - . 1 3 . 2

R e n n e r & 298 7-9 77 1 3 6 I i S t a f f o r d ( 1 9 7 2 )

290 10-12 66 1 7 1 4 . 4

S a y r e & B a l l 214 7-9 8 9 . 2 - 1 0 . 8 ( 1 9 7 5 )

i Y

205 10-12 42 .4 - 57 .6 I

i

T i s h e r ( 1 9 7 1 ) 2 3 2 7- 9 71 .6 - 28.4 :

3

W h e e l e r & Kass 1 6 8 1 0 78 .5 - 21.5 1 ( 1 9 7 7 ) f

B P

%

! i I% 2 2 J i 11

ow ell (1979) , working i n Canada, t e s t e d 112 randomly 3%

s e l e c t e d grade seven through el;$& s u b j e c t s and q u n d 88

p e r c e n t of t h e grade seven and e i g h t group t o be concre te-

o p e r a t i a n a l . I n A u s t r a l i a , T i she r (1971) found 71.5 p e r

c e n t of a sample of 232 jun io r secondary s t u d e n t s t o be

concre te -opera t iona l . Sayre and B a l l (1975) found 13.5 p e r

c e n t of t h e i r sample of 214 grade seven, e i g h t and n ine

s t u d e n t s i n t h e United S t a t e s t o be formal. Working wi th

a s l i g h t l y o l d e r group, Wheeler and Kass (1977) found 21.5

p e r c e n t of t h e i r sample of grade t e n chemistry s t u d e n t s i n

Canada t o be f u l l y formal-operational. ' While t h i s i s t h e

h i g h e s t percentage r e p o r t e d , it means t h a t only o n e - f i f t h

of t h e s t u d e n t s a t t h a t l e v e l a r e capable of c o n s i s t e n t l y '

ope ra t ing wi th formal reasoning p a t t e r n s .

F u r t h e r , s t u d i e s c a r r i e d o u t on a much l a r g e r popula-

t i o n < such a s those conducted by Sbayer e t a 1 (19761-in t h e

United Kingdom and Karplus e t a 1 (1977a) i n A u s t r i a , Den-.

mark, Germany, Great B r i t a i n , I t a l y , Sweden and t h e United -

S t a t e s gave a s i m i l a r p i c t u r e of i n t e l l e c t u a l development.

FOG example, tk Shayer s tudy , which t e s t e d over 10,000

s t u d e n t s between t h e ages of n ine and f o u r t e e n y e a r s , showed

t h a t most s t u d e n t s i n e a r l y adolescence showed r a p i d

development i n concre te t h i n k i n g b u t t h a t only o n e - f i f t h of

them showed f u r t h e r development toward formal-opera t ional

thought, I n f a c t , only 5 p e r c e n t of t h e s t u d e n t s t e s t e d

had reached - t h a t s t a g e by age 14-16'years .

which t e s t e d 1800 g i r l s and an almost

o f boys i n t h e 13 t o 15-year-old age range was

i n t h a t i t was on ly concerned w i t h two a r e a s

I t showed t h a t a l a r g e f r a c t i o n of

t h e s t u d e n t s used concre te reasoning p a t t e r n s e x c l u s i v e l y

when doing problems invo lv ing p r o p o r t i o n a l reasoning and

c o n t r o l of v a r i a b l e s .

I t should a l s o be noted h e ~ e t h a t t h e au thors of t h e

Karplus s tudy found. smal l b u t s i g n i f i c a n t country-to-country

d i f f e r e n c e s which they a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e i n f l u e n c e o f teach-

i n g on t h e development of t h e reasoning p a t t e r n s i n v e s t i g a t e d .

They cons idered t h a t "applying p r o p o r t i o n a l o r cont ro l -of - .

v a r i a b l e s reasoning i s n o t t h e r e s u l t of a p rocess

e x c l u s i v e l y i n t e r n a l t o t h e young people" (Karplus e t a l l

1977a, p.416).

Meanwhile, i t must be concluded from t h e s t u d i e s of t h e

i n t e l l e c t u a l l e v e l of development of s t u d e n t s i n jun io r

secondary schoo l s & a t only 15 t o 20 pe r .cent of t h e s t u d e n t s

a r e capable of ope-ting a t t h e f u l l y formal-opera t ional

l e v e l . While t h e r e would be some, about 15 p e r c e n t , a t t h e '

t r a n s i t i o n a l l e v e l most, around 70 pe r c e n t , would be

concre te -opera t iona l .

The n e x t t o p i c r

the l e a r n e r s 1 l e v e l

i n sc ience c l a s s e s .

of d i s c u s s i o n , then , i s t h e

of development has on t h e i r

e f f e c t t h a t

achievement

Level of C o g n i t i v e Develbpment and Achievement i n S c i e n c e C l a s s e s

I f , a s j u s t concluded, t h e m a j o r i t y of a d o l e s c e n t s i n

h i g h s c h o o l s f u n c t i o n a t t h e c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l l e v e l and

t h u s do n o t p o s s e s s fo rma l -ope ra t iona l r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s ,

t h e n t h i s would b e expec ted t o a f f e c t t h e i r achievement i n

s c i e n c e . I n f a c t , s e v e r a l i n v e s t i g a t o r s have examined t h e

r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e c o g n i t i v e l e v e l of development o f

s t u d e n t s and t h e i r g r a d e s i n s c i e n c e s u b j e c t s , o r t h e i r

l e v e l of achievement i n s c i e n c e tests. D e C a r c e r , Gabel ,

and S t a v e r ' s (1978) rev iew o f some of t h e s e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s

showed t h a t h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s ' g r a d e s and SAT s c o r e s

w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t h e s t u d e n t s ' l e v e l s

o f c o g n i t i v e development.

For example, Sheehan (19701, who worked w i t h 104

randomly s e l e c t e d h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s , found t h a t s u b j e c t s

c l a s s i f i e d a s fo rma l -ope ra t iona l on a p r e - t e s t c o n s i s t e n t l y

s c o r e d h i g h e r on a p o s t - t e s t of s c i e n c e q u e s t i o n s abou t

t o p i c s t a u g h t d u r i n g t h e i n t e r v e n i n g p e r i o d t h a n t h o s e

c l a s s i f i e d a s non-formal. S i m i l a r l y , Say re and B a l l (1975) , who randomly s e l e c t e d 214 s t u d e n t s i n h i g h s c h o o l s i n g rades

seven t o n i n e and 205 s t u d e n t s i n g rades t e n t o twe lve , sub-

s e q u e n t l y c l a s s i f i e d them a s formal o r non-formal on f i v e

P i a g e t i a n t a s k s . They t h e n compared t h e s t u d e n t ' s i n t e l l e c -

t u a l l e v e l a s de te rmined by t h e s e t a s k s w i t h t h e g r a d e s

o b t a i n e d i n a l l o f t h e s t u d e n t ' s s u b j e c t s . Subsequent

a n a l y s i s showed t h a t b o t h j u n i o r an'd s e n i o r h i g h school

s t u d e n t s who w e r e c l a s s i f i e d a s formal r e c e i v e d s i g n i f i -

c a n t l y h i g h e r g r a d e s t h a n d i d t h o s e c l a s s i f i e d a s non-formal.

Lawson and Renner (1974) admin i s t e r ed f o u r P i a g e t i a n

t a s k s t o 134 s t u d e n t s i n g rades t e n , e l e v e n and twelve i n

a h igh s c h o o l i n an above ave rage suburban p o p u l a t i o n i n

Oklahoma. Then t h e y t e s t e d t h e same s t u d e n t s ' unde r s t and ing

o f s c i e n c e s u b j e c t m a t t e r , t a u g h t d u r i n g t h a t c u r r e n t s c h o o l

y e a r , w i t h 15 c o n c r e t e and 1 5 formal m u l t i p l e c h o i c e ques-

t i o n s . The r e s u l t s suppor t ed Sayre and B a l l ' s p remise t h a t

c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s would be unab le t o deve lop

unde r s t and ing o f formal concep t s a l t hough th'ey would under-

s t a n d c o n c r e t e concep t s . I n a c r i t i c a l a n a l y s i s o f t h i s

s t u d y by Wilson ( 1 9 7 7 ) , he commented " t h a t h i g h e r l e v e l +

q u e s t i o n s (Bloom's Taxonomy) a r e more d i f f i c u l t f o r s t u d e n t s

t o a n s w e r . . . I t i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t s t u d e n t s on a c o n c r e t e

l e v e l f i n d s i m p l e r q u e s t i o n s e a s i e r t o answer" ( p . 1 4 ) .

P u t more s imply , t h e r e s e a r c h conf i rms what one would

e x p e c t : s t u d e n t s w i t h h i g h e r l e v e l s of c o g n i t i v e develop-

ment a r e c a p a b l e of h i g h e r achievement i n s c i e n c e , when

t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r is more d i f f i c u l t and more a b s t r a c t ,

t h a n s t u d e n t s w i t h a lower l e v e l o f development. For t h i s

. r ea son , a s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n of secondary s c i e n c e s u b j e c t

matter, p a r t i c u l a r l y t h a t which d e a l s w i t h t h e o r i e s and

concep t s o r which i n v o l v e s p r o p o r t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g and t h e r <

fo rmula t ion o f mathemat ica l r e l a t i o n s h i p s between v a r i a b l e s ,

i s n o t s u i t a b l y matched t o t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l l e v e l of t h e

l e a r n e r .

While d i s c u s s i n g achievement and i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o

i n t e l l e c t u a l development, it i s a p p r o p r i a t e t o examine

b r i e f l y both of t h e s e i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e m o r e g e n e r a l

measure of i n t e l l i g e n c e : IQ.

IQ and P i a g e t ' s S tages of Development

The d i s t r i b u t i o n of P i a g e t i a n s t a g e s of t h i n k i n g i n

B r i t i s h middle and secondary school c h i l d r e n a s r e p o r t e d by

Shayer e t a1 (1976) , r e f e r r e d t o e a r l i e r i n t h i s review,

suggested t h a t s t u d e n t s wi th h igh a b i l i t y l e v e l a s measured

by i n t e l l i g e n c e tests developed more r a p i d l y toward t h e

formal s thge than those wi th average a b i l i t y . Of a school

p o p u l a t i which had s t u d e n t s i n t h e top twenty p e r c e n t 4 of a b i l i t y , 2 3 p e r c e n t had reached t h e f u l l y formal s t a g e

by age 14-16 y e a r s , compared wi th 5 pe r c e n t a t t h a t l e v e l

i n an average school popula t ion .

This i s i n agreement wi th s t u d i e s r e p o r t e d by B l a s i

and Hoeffel (1974) . The i r t a b u l a t i o n of t h e percentages

of formal-opera t ional t h i n k e r s i n va r ious popula t ions by

age and by IQ range showed t h a t when t h e I Q range was above

average t h e percentage of s u b j e c t s who opera ted a t t h e ,

formal-opera t ional l e v e l was always h igher f o r a given age

range than when t h e IQ range was average. For example,

Lunzer (1965) found t h a t 48 t o 54 pe r c e n t of above average

. -

I Q e l e v e n t o fou r t een -yea r -o lds w e r e f u l l y fo rma l . D u l i t

(1972) , who t e s t e d boys between s i x t e e n and seven teen y e a r s

.of age w i t h an I Q range o f 130-140,found 75 p e r c e n t of

e f u l l y formal . P

r ies (1974) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between

IQ , achievement and p i a g e t i a n assessments and found t h a t

P i a g e t i a n t a s k s appeared t o measure d i f f e r e n t . t h i n g s from

e i t h e r achievement o r i n t e l l i g e n c e tests. She r e p o r t e d t h a t

h e r r e s u l t s ag reed w i t h t h e low t o moderate r e l a t i o n s h i p s

r e p o r t e d between P i a g e t i a n t a s k measurements and IQ c i t e d .-

i n o t h e r l i t e r a t u r e .

While IQ and P i a g e t i a n s t a g e r e f e r t o d i f f e r e n t meas-

u r e s , it a p p e a r s t h a t s t u d e n t s who a r e found t o s c o r e w e l l ,*

on IQ tests a r e l i k e l y t o deve lop t o t h e s t a g e of f u l l y d. is

formal t h i n k i n g a t a younger age than s t u d e n t s who have low

IQ s c o r e s . '

S t u d e n t s i n t h e same s c i e n c e c l a s s w i l l have v a r y i n &

a b i l i t i e s and w i l l be a t d i f f e r e n t P i a g e t i a n l e v e l s o f

development. Recognizing t h i s , some t e a c h e r s have a t t empted

t o d e v i s e t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s which would overcome t h e

d i f f e r e n c e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y when t r y i n g t o t e a c h s c i e n c e

t o p i c s which r e q u i r e t h e unde r s t and ing of a b s t r a c t concep t s .

S t u d i e s which i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e e f f e c t s o f t h e s e d i f f e r e n t

t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s on s t u d e n t s ' unde r s t and ing o f t h e

s c i e n c e concep t s t a u g h t w i l l now b e d i s c u s s e d .

Teaching S t r a t e g i e s Employed i n an Attempt t o OErcome D i f f e r e n c e s i n Cogn i t i ve Leve ls of S t u d e n t s i n Sc i ence C l a s s e s

Most of t h e expe r imen ta l ' s t u d i e s which have i n v e s t i g a t e d

t h e e f f e c t s o f d i f f e r e n c e s i n i n s t r u c t i o n a l mode on ach ieve-

ment i n s c i e n c e s u b j e c t s have used two d i f f e r e n t methods o f , .

t e ach ing . One, r e f e r r e d t o a s an a c t i v e o r c e n c r e t e method,

i nvo lved an emphasis on t h e hand l ing of models and t h e

man ipu la t ion o f , and i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h , c o n c r e t e o b j e c t s .

The o t h e r , r e f e r r e d t o a s v e r b a l or fo rma l , used a d i d a c t i c

approach i n which s t u d e n t s w e r e s imply t o l d abou t t h e t-

s c i e n c e t o p i c s or w e r e i nvo lved i n ' v e r b a l r e a s o n i n g abou t

new t o p i c s be ing p r e s e n t e d .

T a l l e y (19 73) i n a one-semester i n t r o d u c t o r y c o l l e g e

chemis t ry c o u r s e provided a n ' e x p e r i m e n t a l group o f s t u d e n t s

w i t h molecular models f o r a l l t h e r e a c t i o n s s t u d i e d and

encouraged t h e s t u d e n t s i n t h a t group t a u s e t h e models

t o r e p r e s e n t a l l t h e r e a c t i o n s i n t r o d u c e d and s t u d i e d i n

t h e semes te r - long c o u r s e . The c o n t r o l group w e r e t a u g h t

by t h e d i d a c t i c method. For q u e s t i o n s i n t h e p o s t - t e s t ,

which invo lved h i g h e r c o g n i t i v e l e v e l t h i n k i n g , t h e e x p e r i -

menta l group showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r achievement ,

s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h t h e models had enab led

t h e s t u d e n t s t o come t o a b e t t e r unde r s t and ing o f t h e

chemis t ry s t u d i e d .

Sheehan ( 1 9 7 0 ) worked w i t h s t u d e n t s i n a younger age

group: t h o s e between 12- 6 and 1 3 - 5 y e a r s i n a j u n i o r 1

secondary h igh s c h o o l . Having a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e Longeot

t e s t t o c l a s s i f y a l a r g e group o f s t u d e n t s a c c o r d i n g t o 4

P i a g e t i a n s t a g e , he randomly s e l e c t e d 30 s t u d e n t s from t h e

conc re t e - o p e r a t i o n a l and 3 0 from t h e f o rma l -ope ra t iona l

s t a g e s . Half o f each of tfiese groups w e r e t h e n a s s i g n e d

t o two d i f f e r e n t modes o f i n s t r u c t i o n ; c o n c r e t e and formal ,

i n t h r e e s c i e n c e concep t s .

The r e s u l t s of t h e p o s t - t e s t on unde r s t and ing o f t h e

s c i e n c e t a u g h t d u r i n g t h e t h r e e d a y s ' i n s t r u c t i o n showed

t h a t t h e h i g h e s t a c h i e v e r s w e r e t h e s t u d e n t s c l a s s i f i e d a s

formal who had r e c e i v e d c o n c r e t e i n s t r u c t i o n . The ach ieve-

ment of t h e formal s t u d e n t s t a u g h t by t h e fo rma l method was

h i g h e r , b u t o n l y s l i g h t l y , t h a n t h e c o n c r e t e s t u d e n t s t a u g h t

by c o n c r e t e method.

Sheehan concluded from t h e s e r e s u l t s t h a t formal-

o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s a c h i e v e b e t t e r i n s c i e n c e t h a n

c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s r e g a r g l e s s of t h e method o f

i n s t r u c t i o n . Secondly, c o n c r e t e i n s t r u c t i o n was more

e f f e c t i v e t h a n formal i n s t r u c t i o n w i t h b o t h formal-

o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s and c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s .

I t appeared t h a t when s t u d e n t s manipula ted m a t e r i a l s and

i n t e r a c t e d w i t h them, more a s s i m i l a t i o n and accommodation

o f new i n f o r m a t i o n i n t o t h e i r e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s occu r red ,

which produced a consequent i n c r e a s e i n t h e i r knowledge.

I n a n o t h e r s t u d y , conducted by Cantu and Herron (1978) ,

h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s w e r e c l a s s i f i e d a s c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l

and f o r m a l - o p e r a t i o n a l by a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of t h e Longeot

test . Twenty s t u d e n t s from each ca t ego ry w e r e subsequen t ly

a s s igned t o two chemis t ry c l a s s e s . They w e r e t a u g h t s i x

chemis t ry concep t s , one p e r week f o r s i x weeks i n a d a i l y

twenty-minute a c t i v i t y p e r i o d , by two d i f f e r e n t i n s t r u c -

t i o n a l methods.

The expe r imen ta l group w e r e p rovided w i t h d iagrams,

examples , models and ~ l l u s t r a t i o n s t o focus t h e s t u d e n t s '

a t t e n t i o n on t h e p e r c e p t i b l e a t t r i b u t e s o f t h e a b s t r a c t

concep t s be ing t a u g h t i n an .a t tempt t o r educe t h e need f o r

hypo the t i co -deduc t ive r e a s o n i n g u n a v a i l a b l e t o t h e s t u d e n t s

who w e r e c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l . The o t h e r group was t a u g h t

by v e r b a l methods w i t h o u t any o f t h e a i d s mentioned above.

On t h e p o s t - t e s t , which was des igned t o test t h e

s t u d e n t s ' unde r s t and ing o f t h e s i x concep t s t a u g h t d u r i n g

t h e s t u d y , t h e c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s who had been

t a u g h t w i t h t h e a i d of examples, w e r e found t o have ach ieved

s i g n i f i c a l y h i g h e r t h a n t h o s e t a u g h t w i t h o u t t h e a i d s . % Unlike t h e ~ h e e h a n s t u d y , t h e r e was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e k

ence i n achievement between t h e formal s t u d e n t s t a u g h t by

e a c h method. Cantu and Herron cons ide red t h e f o l l o w i n g

conc lus ion j u s t i f i e d : "No m a t t e r whether c o n c r e t e o r formal

concep t s a r e be ing t a u g h t one should e x p e c t t h e achievement

o f fomna l -ope ra t iona l s t u d e n t s t o be g r e a t e r t h a n t h e

ach ievement lof c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s . " F u r t h e r ,

"no t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g y w i l l e l i m i n a t e t h e d i f f e i e n c e i n

achievement observed between concre te -and- formal -opera t iona l

s t u d e n t s " ( p . 142) . Goodstein and Howe (1978) reached t h e s a m e c o n c l u s i o n s

a f t e r t h e i r s t u d y , which involved f o u r c l a s s e s o f a r e g u l a r

h i g h s c h o o l chemis t ry cou r se i n s i x weeks' i n s t r u c t i o n i n

s t o i c h i o m e t r y . They chose t h i s p a r t i c u l a r t o p i c because it

r e q u i r e d knowledge o f t h e p a r t i c u l a t e n a t u r e o f m a t t e r ,

unde r s t and ing o f t h e mole concept and t h e a b i l i t y t o do

p r o p o r t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g , a l l o f which r e q u i r e d formal-

ope ra t , i ona l r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s . Also , t h i s t o p i c depended

o n l y minimal ly on p rev ious l e a r n i n g i n t h e c o u r s e which

meant t h a t any achievement a s measured by t h e p o s t - t e s t

would depend v e r y l a r g e l y on i n s t r u c t i o n i n t h e t o p i c

d u r i n g t h e exper iment .

, , . They f i r s t de te rmined t h e P i a g e t i a n s t a g e o f each

s t u d e n t by u s i n g a t e s t des igned and , , v a l i d a t e d by Gray.

Then i n s t r u c t i o n was g iven t o a l l f o u r c l a s s e s o v e r a p e r i o d

o f s i x weeks. Two o f t h e c l a s s e s w e r e t a u g h t by methods

which made f r e q u e n t u se o f models of a toms, i o n s and

molecules whenever p o s s i b l e , and a l s o i n c l u d e d a c t i v i t i e s

which invo lved t h e k d e a o f weight r a t i o s of atoms o f d i f f e r -

e n t e lements . The o t h e r two c l a s s e s w e r e t a u g h t by t h e

l e c t u r e - r e s p o n s e mode-but t h i s was combined w i t h t h e

normal l a b o r a t o r y work f o r t h i s t o p i c .

The r e s u l t s o f t h e p o s t - t e s t showed t h a t t h e conc re t e -

o p e r a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s d i d n o t p r o f i t from t h e use of

concrete-examplars b u t t h a t those s t u d e n t s who were a t t h e

f u l l y formal-opera t ional s t a g e did. Again it appeared t h a t #'

t h e s t u d e n t s who b e n e f i t t e d most from a c t i v e i n s t r u c t i o n a l

methods were those who a l ready possessed U e underlying

s t r u c t u r e s of the formal s t a g e with which t o i n t e r a c t wi th

t h e m a t e r i a l s and i d e a s presented .

ca ted t h a t i f t h e intended l e a r n e r s w e r e i n c a p a b l e of formal

thought when t h e s c i e n c e t o p i c r equ i red t h a t l e v e l of think- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -

i n g , then " t h e t o p i c should ;ither be postponed. . . o r

reduced i n complexity and a b s t r a c t n e s s s o t h a t i t can be

comprehended a t a concre te-opera t ional l e v e l H (p.365).

From t h e four s t u d i e s looked a t i n d e t a i l i n t h i s

s e c t i o n of the review it appears t h a t no m a t t e r what teach-

ing s t r a t e g i e s are employed i n s a i e w c l a s s e s , t h e s t u d e n t - -- -- - -- ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

who benefits most is always the one who has a l r e a d y

developed t h e underlying s t r u c t u r e s of t h e formal-operat ional

thinking patterns. This is p a r t i c u l a r l y e v i d e n t when t h e

sc ience t o p i c being t augh t involves t h e use of those - I

reasoning p a t t e r n s , such a s p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y and t h e formu-

l a t i o n of a b s t x a c t r e l a t i o n s h i p s (as i n t h e Goodstein and

Bowe s tudy above) which a r e considered by P i a g e t n o t t o

develop u n t i l t h e formal s t a g e . I t is concluded t h a t no

teaching s t r a t e g y overcomes t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n cognitive

Formal s t u d e n t s , a r e a t a d i s t i n c t advantage when it

comes t o unde r s t and ing most s c i e n c e concepts . Recogni t ion

of t h i s advantage h a s l e d s o m e s c i e n c e e d u c a t o r s t o inves-

t i g a t e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f t r a i n i n g c o n c r e t e s t u d e n t s t o Y

develop some o f t h e t h i n k i n g p a t t e r n s known t o be posses sed

by formal s t u d e n t s . -

T r a i n i n g S t u d i e s Which Attempt t o Develop Formal-Operat ional ~ e a s o n i n g P a t t e r n s '

- D e Ca rce r e t a1 (1978) c i t e d 15 such t r a i n i n g s t u d i e s .

which have been r e p o r t e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e s i n c e 1971 and

d i s c u s s e d them acco rd ing t o t h e c a t e g o r y on which t h e t r a i n -

i n g focused. Those i n which s t u d e n t s w e r e t r a i n e d t o g i v e

c o r r e c t answers on s p e c i f i c P i a g e t i a n t a s k s w e r e looked a t

f i r s t .

T r a i n i n g on S p e c i f i c P i a g e t i a n Tasks

S t u d i e s i n t h i s group measured t h e e f f e c t s o f d i f f e r -

e n t i n s t r u c t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s on s t u d e n t s ' achievement o f

d e l i m i t e d P i a g e t i a n problems. Within t h i s g roup w e r e

s t u d i e s such a s t hose c a r r i e d o u t by Bass and Montague

( 1 9 7 2 ) , who t r a i n e d n i n t h g rade s t u d e n t s by means o f s e l f -

- - - i n s t r u c t i o n a l s e q u e n c m - tn qiue clarrecLms-sF!~-------

- --

P i a g e t i a n problems. The s t u d e n t s used e a c h sequence f o r

t h r e e one-hour s e s s i o n s o v e r a p e r i o d o f t h r e e day

pe rcen tage of s t u d e n t s who could c o r r e c t l y r e c o g n i

\ 4--% : 4 4 a ,-

h c

q u a n t i t a t i v e r e l a t i o n between t h e f o k f a c t o r s involved i n

t h e inclined-pl'ane problem d i d n o t apprec iab ly d i f f e r

between p r e - t e s t and p o s t - t e s t . On t h e ba lance t a s k , t h e

P percentage o p e r a t i n g a t upper formal s t a g e , I11 B , inc reased

from 4 5 t o 75. While no l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e was r e p o r t e d ,

t h e au thors cons idered t h a t t h e l e a r n i n g h ie ra rchy they had

devised f o r t h e balance t a s k was more s u c c e s s f u l than t h e

one f o r t h e inc l ined-p lane t a s k . They concluded t h a t t h e

s e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n a l format used i n t h i s s tudy was a s e r i o u s

l i m i t a t i o n on t h e s tudy and concluded t h a t t h e type o f

modi f i ca t ions i n t h e s t u d e n t s ' t h ink ing t h a t they were

hoping t o achieve was probably b e s t accomplished through

a c t i v e i n t e r v e n t i o n s by an experienced t eacher .

I t appeared from t h i s and o t h e r s t u d i e s t h a t appro-

p r i a t e i n s t r u c t i o n a l procedures could be developed t o t each

s t u d e n t s s p e c i f i c P i a g e t i a n t a s k s . S ince no d a t a was

c o l l e c t e d on t h e r e t e n t i o n of t h e s e a b i l i t i e s , D e Carcer

e t a 1 cons idered t h a t t h e use fu lness of such s t u d i e s t o

s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s was very l i m i t e d . The s c i e n c e t e a c h e r

i n t e r e s t e d i n promoting t h e development of formal thought

has no i d e a whether t h e a b i l i t y t o master t h e t a s k s i s per- 4

manent o r t r a n s i t o r y . Nor does he know whether i t can be

t r a n s f e r r e d t o o t h e r t a s k s .

Tra in ing t o I s o l a t e and Control Var iab les

z. ' - S

*

- % The a b i l i t y t o c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e s has been t h e focus

of a l a r g e number of t r a i n i n g s t u d i e s even though it i s on ly

one component o f t h e s t r u c t u r e s o f formal thought . I t i s , P however, a component which i s c r u c i a l t o u s i n g s c i e n t i f i c

reasoning i n s c i e n c e c l a s s e s .

The s tudy c a r r i e d o u t by Lawson and wollman (1976)

us ing s t u d e n t s i n grades f i v e and seven i s probably t h e most

impor tant one. I n i t .they , p r e t e s t e d s t u d e n t s t o c l a s s i f

them according t o t h e i r P i a g e t i a n s t a g e , then randomly

ass igned them t o two groups. One group rece ived t r a i n i n g L

Z i n t h e concept of c o n t r o l l i n g v a r i a b l e s by p a r t i c i p a t i n g

i n f o u r 30-minute s e s s i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l t r a i n i n g on s e v e r a l

i t a s k s . The o t h e r group rece ived no t r a i n i n g .

i

Fol-lowing t h e t r a i h i n g s e s s i o n s , a l l s t u d e n t s i n both

groups w e r e p o s t - t e s t e d us ing t h r e e c a r e f u l l y s e l e c t e d -

P i a g e t i a n t a s k s . One of t h e s e t a s k s determined whether P ?

t h e t r a i n i n g was e f f e c t i v e i n f a c i l i t a t i n g t h e a b i l i t y t o -

c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e s wi th m a t e r i a l s i d e n t i c a l t o those used - dur ing t r a i n i n g . The second t a s k determined whether t h e

. - t r a i n i n g was g e n e r a l i z a b l e t o ano@er problem invo lv ing t h e

c o n t r o l of v a r i a b l e s ( s p e c i f i c t r a n s f e r ) , whi le t h e t h i r d

t a s k was used t o determine t h e e x t e n t t o which t r a i n i n g

encouraged formal t h i n k i n g (non-specif i c t r a n s f e r ) w h i c h

P i a g e t says develops a t t h e same t i m e a s t h e a b i l i t y t o - c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e s .

The r e s u l t s showed t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n d i d a f f e c t t h e

t r a n s i t i o n from c o n c r e t e t o formal func t ion ing w i t h r e s p e c t

t o t h e a b i l i t y t o c o n t r o l - v a r i a b l e s . I t a l s o showed t h a t

t h e t r a i n i n g was g e n e r a l i z a b l e t o t r a n s f e r even f o r

s t u d e n t s whose p r e - t e s t concre te . The

t r a i n i n g d i d 'not g e n e r a l i z e t o non-speci f ic t r a n s f e r .

Case and Fry (1973) developed a program t o t r a i n non-

formal , low SES secondary s t u d e n t s t o des ign c o n t r o l l e d

experiments. Thei r t r a i n i n g , which took one 40-minute per-

i o d every week f o r twelv; weeks, involved t h e s t u d e n t s i n

des igning experiments i n which only one f a c t o r was v a r i e d

a t a t ime, whi le 'all o t h e r s w e r e h e l d equal . The p o s t - t e s t

showed t h a t t h o s e s t u d e n t s who had p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e t r a i n - .:

c- ad - i n g program cG$ld d e t e c t f laws i n experiments which d i d n o t -- -

I< 1

c o n t r o l a l l variab. les b u t t h e one being i n v e s t i g a t e d , s ig -

n i f i c a n t l y more Often than t h e c o n t r o l group.

Again, n e i t h e r t h e Lawson and Wollman, nor t h e Case

and Fry s tudy t e s t e d t h e d u r a b i l i t y of t h e newly-acquired

s k i l l . Bredderman (1973) , however, who d i d test r e t e n t i o n

of t h e newly-acquired a b i l i t y t o c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e s showed

t h a t t h e e f f e c t o f t r a i n i n g was only t r a n s i t o r y .

I t appeared, then , t h a t even when t r a in i -ng s t u d i e s w e r e

apparen t ly s u c c e s s f u l and t h e sc ience t e a c h e r had t h e d e t a i l s \

of t h e s u c c e s s f u l i n s t r u c t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s t h e r e was more

t h a t he needed t o know, such a s r e t e n t i o n span, b e f o r e he

could a t t empt t o use those s t r a t e g i e s w i t h confidence t o

promote i n t e l l e c t u a l deve lopmen t . ~e c'arcer t ~ t J! c+onsi~iereii

& h a t more s t u d i e s needed to be done w ~ t h adolescents i n t h e

high s c h o o l s i t u a t i o n w i t h l a r c ~ t - r n~trnbr~ s o f sttl~1t.n t s b u f c ? r ~ ~ 4 g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s c o u l d be made bout Lmprovinilr tttc ~ - o q n i t i vr

l e v e l s o f s t uden t s i n secondary scicncc classes.

A f u r t h e r p o i n t t o notice, i s t h a t i n n e a r l y 31 1 t he

-2 .Jc t r a i n i n g s t u d i e s the du~ation of t r a ~ n l n y w ' l s q u ~ t c s h o r t ;

o n e o r two s e s s i o n s p e r w e e k f o r t w o t o Four w e e k s . The>

c o n s t r a i n t s of t h e s c h o o l s i t u a t i a f i in w h i r h t h e s t u d i e s

w e r e carr ied o u t may have demanded th ; i t t h e t i m p s t h e 3tudt.fit

s p e n t o n t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s had t o be sho r t , I t is w c ) r t h w h i l t > Y " '",

n o t i n g , however , t h a t t h e u n c x p e c t c d l y s u c . c e s s f r ~ l t-t.st11 t o t

t h e C a s e and F r y exper iment w a s ob t ,3~ncr l i n s t u c l y w h i i q t l

normal. l e s s o n t i m e .

The shor te r term s t u d i e s clppearztl t.o t w less succ'r.sst uL

e x c e p t t h o s e w h i c h i n v o l vcd t h e c+r>nt ro l F v't r i ,tb l t.s r,t.,lsc>n-

bu t t h e i r me thods need to he tested f u r t h e r on ldrcjer q r o u p s

of s t u d e n t s be fo re t h e y c o u l d be L-oti t-tlntpla t eit for Lassroom

u s e . Lawson and Wollmdn ( 1 9 7 6 ) c o n s i d e r e d thdt 6vc~l i t

t h e y w e r e f o u n d to be u s e f u l t h e y s h o u l d ncb t br i l s e c l to

accelerate dqve lopmen t b u t " k o avoid whak miqh t he ca L 1 ~d t

d

' s t a g e r e t a r d a t i o n ' . . .Ample e v i d e n c e e x i s t s t h d t t h i s pht3n-

omenon of s t age - r e t a rda t i on i s indeed widcspc-cdd" ( p . 2 4 8 ) .

The f a c t t h a t such a l a r g e percentage of t h e secondary

school popula t ion has only concre te -opera t iona l reasoning

p a t t e r n s wi th which e r a t e p l a c e s r e a l c o n s t r a i n t s on

what can be t a u g h t c l a s s e s and what can be under-

s tood and achieved by s t u d e n t s i n those c l a s s e s . Short-term 9 . .

b u r s t s of a t each ing s t r a t e g y t o promote t h e development of

a s i n g l e t r a n s i e n t formal-opera t ional s t r u c t u r e w i l l n o t be

of much use i n overcoming t h i s e x i s t i n g s i t u a t i o n .

I t is not s u r p r i s i n g t h a t consc ien t ious s t u d e n t s , who -I

at tempt t o achieve w e l l ' i n sc ience c l a s s e s where t h e cog- 1

n i t i v e func t ion ing requ i red by t h e course con ten t i s above

t h e i r l e v e l of i n t e l l e c t u a l development, r e s o r t t o r o t e

memory o r l e a r n a lgor i thms t o enable them t o cope wi th prob-

lems i n the s u b j e c t . According t o Herron (1978b) s t u d e n t s

cannot h e l p b u t "develop poor s tudy h a b i t s , poop a t t i t u d e s

towards school , and low self- image" (p.602).

What a r e needed a r e long-term teach ing procedures and

school exper iences which enable s t u d e n t s t o develop t h e

l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e s of formal thought from those of t h e

concre te s t a g e . Few s t u d i e s have i n v e s t i g a t e d d i r e c t l y

whether any t each ing methods o r sc ience classroom exper-

i e n c e s can achieve t h i s , b u t one s tudy by F r i o t (1976) i s

of i n t e r e s t here .

F r i o t recognized t h a t P i a g e t considered t h a t a s t u d e n t

who possessed t h e p r e r e q u i s i t e phys io log ica l m a t u r i t y would

were permi t ted t o i n t e r a c t wi th o b j e c t s , even t s and s i t u a -

t i o n s i n h i s environment. She t h e r e f o r e s p e c i f i c a l l y set

o u t t o i d e n t i f y jun io r h igh school sc ience courses t h a t

emphasized s t u d e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . She found t h r e e which.

were t augh t a t grade e i g h t and n ine l e v e l and a l l were o f

t h e " inqu i ry k ind" .

Each of 210 s t u d e n t s i n s e v e n . c l a s s e s w e r e in terv iewed

wi th s i x P i a g e t i a n t a s k s t o determine t h e i r l e v e l of devel-

opment. They were then in terv iewed again seven months l a t e r .

I n t h e i n t e r v e n i n g pe r iod those i n f i v e of t h e c l a s s e s were

t a u g h t by t e a c h e r s t r a i n e d i n t h e i n q u i r y curr iculum they

used while t h o s e i n two c o n t r o l c l a s s e s were t a u g h t by t h e

t r ad i t iona l -demons t ra t ion method.

A s expected , over such an extended t i m e a l l groups

showed ga ins i n formal thought between p r e t e s t and post-

test ( s e e Table 3 ) b u t t h e s e ga ins w e r e n o t randomly

d i s t r i b u t e d . S tuden t s i n two of t h e c l a s s e s (grade e i g h t

TSM and grade n ine IPS) showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r g a i n s

i n developing t h e reasoning p a t t e r n s of t h e formal-

o p e r a t i o n a l s t a g e than any of t h e o t h e r s . S ince ages w e r e

s i m i l a r and o t h e r s u b j e c t s s t u d i e d w e r e t h e same, F r i o t

concluded t h a t " l e a r n e r s can be moved from concre te opera-

t i o n s t o formal o p e r a t i o n s by v i r t u e of t h e i r school exper-

i ences" (p . 89) . --

While Friot contends t h a t some cufrlPcula a r e b e t t e r

than o t h e r s i n promoting t h e development.to formal-

% o p e r a t i o n a l t hough t , it i s n o t t h e c u r r i c u l a which a r e o f

i n t e r e s t i n t h i s s t u d y b u t r a t h e r t h e methods or s t r a t e g i e s

used i n t e a c h i n g them. I f t h e r e a r e s o m e i n s t r u c t i o n a l

s t r a t e g i e s which can be used i n s c i e n c e c lass rooms which a r e

cons ide red l i k e l y t o promote t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l development o f

s t u d e n t s towards fo rma l t hough t , t hey shou ld be encouraged.

The l i t e r a t u r e d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s r ev i ew l e a v e s no doubt

t h a t t h e s t u d e n t s who p o s s e s s t h e l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e s o f

f o r m a l - o p e r a t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g a r e much b e t t e r a c h i e v e r s i n

s c i e n c e c l a s s e s t han t h o s e who a r e n o t a t t h a t l e v e l . This

i s because many of t h e i m p o r t a n t i d e a s i n s c i e n c e c o u r s e s

r e q u i r e formal r e a s o n i n g f o r t o t a l unders tanding . I t i s

known, however, t h a t o n l y abou t 2 0 p e r c e n t of s t u d e n t s

p o s s e s s t h a t a b i l i t y . Teaching s t r a t e g i e s which a t t e m p t t o

+ -- =e overcome t h e l a c k o f development o f t h a t a b i l i t y favour the*

s t u d e n t who i s fo rma l r a t h e r t h a n d s t u d e n t who is cgn-

crete. Shor t - te rm t r a i n i n g s t u d i e s appea r t o promote t h e

development of o n l y one a s p e c t of formal r e a s o n i n g and t h a t

development i s o n l y t r a n s i t o r y .

The t e a c h i n g of some a b s t r a c t concep t s , such a bond- - L, i i n g t h e o r y , can be de l ayed b u t t h e r e comes a t i m e , par-

t i c u l a r l y a t s e n i o r h i g h s c h o o l , when c e r t a i n concep t s must

be t a u g h t i n b i o l o g y , chemis t ry and p h y s i c s and t h e s e

concep t s , such a s genes , s t o i c h i o m e t r y and t h e laws o f

motion, a l l demand fo rma l -ope ra t iona l t h i n k i n g p a t t e r n s .

S i n c e t h e r e i s no qu ick and e a s y way t o deve lop t h e under- ;_, \~

l y i n g s t r u c t u r e s when t h e need a r i s e s , a n d , n o t e a c h i n g

s t r a t e g y which overcomes t h e l a c k o f them, t hen i t i s d e s i r -

a b l e t h a t s c i e n c e c o u r s e s i n g r a d e s e i g h t , n i n e and t e n aim

t o deve lop them. S t u d e n t s i n j u n i o r secondary s c i e n c e

c l a s s e s would have t h e n e c e s s a r y m a t u r a t i o n a l l e v e l f o r t h e

development. What a r e needed, t h e n , a r e g u i d e l i n e s abou t

t e a c h i n g p rocedures which cou ld be used i n j u n i o r secondary

s c i e n c e c l a s s e s which cou ld promote t h e development of

f o r m a l - o p e r a t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s . S t u d e n t s who pro-

ceeded t o h i g h e r l e v e l b i o l o g y , chemis t ry and p h y s i c s c l a s s e s

would t h e n b e b e t t e r equipped t o unde r s t and t h e c o n t e n t s of

t h o s e cou r ses . Th i s i s n o t t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n b u t it

i s one a t which s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s could aim.

I t i s i n t e n d e d , t h e n , t o e x t r a c t from t h e l i t e r a t u r e

t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s and p rocedures which a r e c o n s i d e r e d

I by e d u c a t o r s i n t e r e s t e d i n P i a g e t ' s t heo ry most l i k e l y t o

promote t h e development o f t h e o p e r a t i o n s o f formal t hough t

from c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s . While Herron

(1978b) c o n s i d e r s r e s e a r c h on s t r a t e g i e s t o enhance i n t e l l e c -

t u a l development is s t i l l i n i t s i n f a n c y and t h a t " i t i s

premature to s u g g e s t t h e e x a c t s t r a t e g y t h a t might b e

s u c c e s s f u l " ( p . 6 0 1 ) , t h e r e are many g u i d e l i n e s which keep

on be ing emphasized i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e which appear u s e f u l

as long-term t e a c h i n g p rocedures t o enhance i n t e l l e c t u a l

development.

~ o k @ T e r m Teaching S t r a t e g i e s t o Promote I n t e l l e c t u a l Development

Having now thoroughly i n v e s t i g a t e d P i a g e t ' s theory of

i n t e l l e c t u a l development a s it r e l a t e s t o t h e t each ing of

sc ience and t h e development of formal reasoning i n adoles-

c e n t s , i t i s p o s s i b l e t o enumerate s e v e r a l impor tant guide-

l i n e s f o r p u t t i n g theory i n t o p r a c t i c e . There a r e c e r t a i n

s t r a t e g i e s which a r e f r e q u e n t l y mentioned asdbeing necessary 6

f o r t h e developm&t of t h e underlying s t r u c t u r e s of Qrmal

thought from those of t h e concre te s t a g e .

P i a g e t ' s own r e s e a r c h has n o t been concerned wi th

educat ion b u t , r a t h e r , w i t h t h e s tudy of t h e growth of know-

ledge and t h e development o f t h e underlying c o g n i t i v e pro-

c e s s e s o r mental o p e r a t i o n s which c o n t r o l t h a t growth. Some

of h i s comments, however, l eave no doubt t h a t he cons ide r s -L..-b

h i s theory p e r t i n e n t t o educat ion . H i s s t a t ements i n Schwebel

and Raph (1973) a r e an example; when he c r i t i c i z e s : w

F t h e mis takes of c l a s s i c a l e d u c a t i o n a l theory , which reduces t h e l e a r n e r ' s r o l e t o looking and l i s t e n i n g i n s t e a d of a c t i n g h imse l f , o r which (and t h i s is almost t h e same t h i n g ) r e - p l a c e s o b j e c t s wi th audio-visual r ep resen ta - t i o n s wi thout concern f o r t h e fundamental r o l e of spontaneous manipulat ions. ( P i a g e t , 1973, p.x)

Educators , too , cons ide r t h a t t h e r e a r e many implica-

t i o n s f o r t each ing methods t o be gained from s tudy ing h i s

theory of i n t e l l e c t u a l development. S i g e l (1969) cons idered

t h a t "The theory . . . p r o v i d s s a conceptual framework w i t h i n - which t o . . . dev i se teaching s t r a t e g i e s " (p . 4 6 6 ) . Duckworth

(1964) was o f t h e same opinion:

L Everybody i n educat ion r e a l i z e s P i a g e t i s say ing something t h a t i s r e l e v a n t t o t h e t each ing of c h i l d r e n .... Contrary t o t h e view most o f t e n a t t r i b u t e d t o him he main- t a i n s t h a t good pedogogy can have an e f f e c t ... P i a g e t i s n o t saying t h a t i n t e l l e c t u a l development proceeds a t i t s own pace no m a t t e r what you t r y t o do. H e i s saying t h a t what ' schools t r y t o do i s u s u a l l y i n e f f e c t u a l . You cannot fu r - t h e r understanding i n a c h i l d simply by t a l k i n g , to him.

n

P a r t i c u l a r s t r a t e g i e s w i l l now be enumerated. Accom-

panying each one w i l l be a d i scuss ion of i t s d e r i v a t i o n

from P i a g e t ' s theory o r t h e r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e and an -

exp lana t ion of i t s in tended purpose.

The s i n g l e most impor tant p r o p o s i t i o n t o be de r ived

from P i a g e t ' s work i s t h a t t h e r o l e of t h e c h i l d i n learn-

i n g should be an a c t i v e one. " T h e c h i l d must d i scover t h e

method f o r himself through h i s own a c t i v i t y " ( P i a g e t , 1970,

p .30) . This p o i n t i s c o n t i n u a l l y emphasized by P iage t .

I n another i n s t a n c e he wrote more f u l l y :

% , '1

I t i s a b s o l u t e l y necessary t h a t l e a r n e r s have a t t h e i r d i s p o s a l concre te m a t e r i a l exper iences (and n o t merely p i c t u r e s ) , and t h a t they form t h e i r own hypotheses and v e r i f y them ( o r n o t v e r i f y them) themselves through t h e i r own a c t i v e

manipula t ions . The observed a c t i v i t i e s of o t h e r s , inc lud ing those of t h e t e a c h e r , a r e n o t formative of new o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n t h e c h i l d . ( P i a g e t , 1973, p.x)

S tudents i n s c i e n c e classrooms should be provided wi th

s i t u a t i o n s i n which they themselves experiment , t r y t h i n g s

o u t , manipulate m a t e r i a l s , and i n which they a r e given

time t o t h e i r own q u e s t i o n s and seek t h e i r , o w n answers.

Duckworth (1964) f u r t h e r emphasized t h e p o i n t by saying

t h a t " t h e goa l i n educat ion should n o t be t o i n c r e a s e t h e

amount of knowledge b u t t o c r e a t e an environment i n which

t h e c h i l d can i n v e n t and d i scover" ( p . 4 ) . These exper iences

- a r e e s s e n t i a l f o r i n t e l l e c t u a l development.

Teachers i n secondary sc ience classrooms should , then ,

organize t h e i r teaching s o t h a t s t u d e n t s can manipulate

m a t e r i a l s themselves. The t e a c h e r s would r a r e l y demonstrate

s c i e n t i f i c p r i n c i p l e s by manipulat ing appara tus themselves.

~ c c a s i o n ~ l l ~ t h i s might be necessary t o t each a new tech-

n ique , b u t i t should n o t be used a s a means of t each ing new

concepts and i d e a s . P i a g e t ' s o b j e c t i o n t o demonstrat ions

a s a method of t each ing s t u d e n t s was i l l u s t r a t e d by h i s r e p l y

t o Ha l l (1970) , who asked about t h e e f f e c t o f a t eacher

demonstrat ing t o s t u d e n t s t h e c o r r e c t s o l u t i o n t o t h e

chemicals problem: " I t would be completely u s e l e s s . The

c h i l d must d i s c o v e r t h e method f o r himself through h i s own

a c t i v i t y ' ' (p . 30) . B

Phys ica l exper iences and concre te manipula t ions a r e

n o t t h e only f a c t o r s in f luenc ing development. According t o

P i a g e t (19641, development i s promoted by f o u r f a c t o r s

( a l r e a d y d i scussed i n d e t a i l a t t h e beginning o f t h i s

r e v i e w ) , another of which i s s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n .

Trans la ted t o t h e classroom s i t u a t i o n , t h i s means t h a t

pee r i n t e r a c t i o n s should occur; c l a s s and group d i s c u s s i o n s

should be encouraged and organized s o tAat s t u d e n t s can

. converse, s h a r e exper iences , argue, compare n o t e s and

d i f f e r e n t approaches t o problems, and d i s c u s s c o n f l i c t i n g

r e s u l t s ob ta ined from t h e same experiment. Bra inerd (1978),

i n p o i n t i n g o u t t h e need f o r peer i n t e r a c t i o n s , contended

t h a t d i s c u s s i o n s among p e e r s wi thout t h e i n c l k i o n of t h e

t e a c h e r were more conducive t o causing d i s e q u i l i b r i u m i n

e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s because t h e d i s c u s s i o n s would be l e s s

r e s t r i c t e d . Disequi l ibr ium, according t o P i a g e t , is one

of t h e p r e r e q u i s i t e s f o r t h e development of t h e more

s o p h i s t i c a t e d s t r u c t u r e s of a h igher s t a g e from s impler

ones of a lower s t a g e .

Other educators have a l s o d i scussed t h e need . f o r

s t u d e n t d i s c u s s i o n s i n ' c l a s s r o o m s when cons ide r ing implica-

t i o n s of P i a g e t ' s theory t o educat ion . Renner (Renner e t . a l , 1976) considered. t h a t throughout h i s t o r y classrooms

have had t o be reasonably q u i e t p l a c e s where . s tudent i n t e r -

a c t i o n s have been a c t i v e l y discouraged. whi le he would n o t

endorse a l l forms of v e r b a l s tudent - to-s tudent i n t e r a c t i o n ,

he was emphat ic abou t t h e v a l u e of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n and

c o n s i d e r e d t h a t a "c lass room should show i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h

t h e o b j e c t s o f t h e d i s c i p l i n e and between s t u d e n t s pu r su ing

t h e d i s c i p l i n e " (p .174) . This i s an approach t h a t i s

r e a l i s t i c f o r s c i e n c e c lass ruoms bo th a t t h e *secondary

and c o l l e g e l e v e l f o r which Renner e t a 1 w e r e advoca t ing

i t s implementat ion. S i g e l (1969, p.466) emphasized t h e

same p o i n t : " S o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n and s t i m u l a t i o n which

P i a g e t stresses i s s o i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e development of i n - r\

t e l l i g e n c e can e a s i l y be p rov ided i n t h e s c h o o l c lass room

s i t u a t i o n . "

I n a s c i e n c e c lass room which encouraged p e e r i n t e r -

a c t i o n s s t u d e n t s would d i s c u s s t h e i r o b s e r v a t i o n s and con-

c l u s i o n s w i t h t h e i r c l a s s m a t e s . S t u d e n t s would work i n

s m a l l groups t o f a c i l i t a t e d i s c u s s i o n s , a l t h o u g h t h e r e

would be t i m e s when s t u d e n t s would need t o w r i t e down

r e s u l t s o r do w r i t t e n c a l c u l a t i o n s q u i e t l y on t h e i r own

a f t e r t hey had b e n e f i t t e d from d i s c u s s i o n work.

I n h e l d e r , S i n c l a i r and Bovet ( 1 9 7 4 ) d i s c u s s e d two

m o r e f a c t o r s & i c h w e r e n e c e s s a r y t o cause d i s e q u i l i b r i u m 1 7

i n e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s t h e r e b y promoting t h e development of

new s t r u c t u r e s c a p a b l e o f a s s i m i l a t i n g more a b s t r a c t con-

/ c e p t s . F i r s t , t h e r e must b p a n a p p l i c a t i o n o f e x i s t i n g

schemes t o an i n c r e a s i n g v a r i e t y of s i t u a t i o n s s o t h a t ,

Sooner o r l a t e r , t h i s ' g e n e r a l i z a t i o n en- c o u n t e r s r e s i s t a n c e , mainly from t h e s imu l t aneous a p p l i c a t i o n o f a n o t h e r

j l

4

scheme; t h i s r e s u l t s i n two d i f f e r e n t answers t o one problem and s t i m u l a t e s t h e s u b j e c t seeking a c e r t a i n coherence t o a d j u s t both schemes o r t o l i m i t each t o a p a r t i c u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n ... The s i t u a - t i o n s most l i k e l y t o e l i c i t p r o g r e s s a r e

a those where t h e s u b j e c t i s encouraged t o compare modes of reasoning which vary cons ide rab ly both i n n a t u r e and complexity, b u t which a l l , i n d i v i d u a l l y , a r e a l r e a d y f a m i l i a r t o him. (p.265)

What a r e needed t o develop new s t r u c t u r e s a r e t h e dynamics

o f bhe c o n f l i c t between a l ready e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s o r

schemes. The source of t h e progress i s t h e d i s e q u i l i b r i u m

which i n c i t e s t h e stud-ent t o go beyond h i s p r e s e n t under-

s tanding.

The second f a c t o r which Inhe lde r e t a 1 cons idered

necessary t o induce t h e necessary d i s e q u i l i b r i u m was t h e

exper iencing of a d iscrepancy between t h e s t u d e n t s ' own

i d e a s and p r e d i c t i o n s and t h e a c t u a l outcome of experiments

o r i d e a s wi th which they i n t e r a c t e d .

The i m p l i c a t i o n of t h e s e two i d e a s f o r t h e s c i e n c e

t e a c h e r a t t empt ing t o promote i n t e l l e c t u a l development t o

formal-opera t ional s t r u c t u r e s from concre te -opera t iona l

ones i s clear. The t e a c h e r should in t roduce new work i n

t e r m s of s i m p l e , e a s i l y understood examples which b e a r some

r e l a t i o n t o e x i s t i n g knowledge and then proceed t o more

complex, less e a s i l y expla ined examples. On t h e b a s i s o f

t h e new i d e a s jus t a s s i m i l a t e d s t u d e n t s would then be asked

t o m d i c t t h e outcomes of proposed new experiments o r

a c t i v i t i e s . Having made t h e p r e d i c t i o n s , they should then

p l a n t h e procedures f o r t h e a c t i v i t y t o t e s t o u t t h e i r

1 hypotheses and compare t h e observgd r e s u l t s wi th t h e i r

expected r e s u l t and wi th t h e r e s u l t s of o t h e r s t u d e n t s .

Experience, p a r t i c u l a r l y exper ience of d i s c r e p a n c i e s between one ' s . p r e d i c t i o n s and i d e a s and t h e a c t u a l outcome of t h e i r r e a l i z a t i o n , i s t h e r e f o r e an impor tant f a c t o r i n t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of knowledge. ( I n h e l d e r e t a l , 1974, p . 2 6 7 ) .

b Karplus e t a 1 (1977b) app l i ed t h e same i d e a s i n t h e i r

workshop based on P i a g e t ' s theory of s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n ( o r

e q u i l i b r a t i o n ) which d i scussed sc ience t each ing s t r a t e g i e s

which promoted t h e development o f reasoning.

A s c i e n c e classroom i n which t h e s e i d e a s were p u t

i n t o p r a c t i c e would have s t u d e n t s working o u t t h e i r own

procedures f o r handl ing appara tus and determining r e l a t i o n -

s h i p s between v a r i a b l e s . I n t h i s way- they would be more

l i k e l y t o t h i n k about t h e i r , p r e d i c t i o n s and when necessary

r e a l i z e t h e l i m i t s o f t h e i r p r e s e n t reasoning.

The s t u d e n t s would be encouraged t o make conclus ions

and propose hypotheses on t h e b a s i s of t h e i r obse rva t ions .

I n engaging i n a c t i v i t i e s which they themselves planned,

s t u d e n t s would be fo rced t o t h i n k about t h e i r o b s e r v a t i o n s k %

and a t tempt t o i n t e g r a t e them i n t o t h e i r e x i s t i n g s t r u c -

t u r e s , which would thereby become more complicated and

t h e r e f o r e capable of a s s i m i l a t i n g more complex i d e a s .

Karplus e t a 1 (1977b) developed an approach f o r teach-

i n g sc ience which they cons idered promoted t h e development

o f formal-opera t ional reasoning p a t t e r n s . By d e l i b e r a t e l y

s e t t i n g o u t t o induce d i s e q u i l i b r i u m a t h e y argued t h a t s e l f - i i

r e g u l a t i o n would occur. The i r approach involved a l e a r n i n g i i

c y c l e which c o n s i s t e d of t h r e e phases: e x p l o r a t i o n ,

concept i n t r o d u c t i o n and concept a p p l i c a t i o n . I

The f i r s t phase: explora t ion ,a imed a t inducing d i s - I

C

equ i l ib r ium. They proposed t h a t dur ing e x p l o r a t i o n of a 3 1

2 new to pi^, t e a c h e r s would aim a t g e t t i n g s t u d e n t s t o r e f l e c t ,

3

on p r e s e n t knowledge and thereby recognize i t s l i m i t a t i o n s . 3

During EXPLORATION, t h e s t u d e n t s l e a r n through the i rgown a c t i o n s and r e a c t i o n s i n a new s i t u a t i o n . I n t h i s phase they e x p l o r e new .mate r i a l s and new i d e a s wi th minimal guidance o r expec ta t ion of s p e c i f i c accomplishments. The new exper ience should r a i s e ques t ions t h a t they cannot answer w i t h t h e i r accustomed p a t t e r n s of reasoning. Having made an e f f o r t t h a t was n o t completely success- f u l , t h e s t u d e n t s w i l l be ready f o r s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n . (Karplus e t a l l 1977b, PP-5-81

Tbe p a r t i c u l a r - s t r a t e g y used he re would be one i n which - i

t h e t e a c h e r asked q u e s t i o n s aimed a t determining t h e + - 1

\ + s t u d e n t s ' c u r r e n t l e v e l of th ink ing about t h e t o p i c . ':

- -

The second phase, concept in t rodu&ion, s t a r t e d w i t h

t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of a new concept o r p r i n c i p l e ahd always

fol lowed, and r e l a t e d d i r e c t l y t o , t h e e x p l o r a t i o n a c t i v i - .

ties. I f t h e i n i t i a l a c t i v i t y involved d i s s o l v i n g d i f f -

e r e n t s o l u t e s i n water and maybe comparing t h e amounts of

d i f f e r e n t s o l i d s which d i s s o l v e d in, t h e same volume o f t

water a t d i f f e r e n t tempera tures , then t h e concept i n t r o -

duced might be a q u a n t i t a t i v e i d e a of s o l u b i l i t y o r i t might

involve t h e i d e a of concen t ra t ion of a s o l u t i o n .

During concept a p p l i c a t i o n , t h e l a s t phase, s t u d e n t s

a p p l i e d t h e newly-acquired concept t o a wide v a r i e t y of

s i t u a t i o n s . For example, having worked o u t a s u i t a b l e way

of measuring t h e s o l u b i l i t y o f s o l i d s and having r e a l i z e d

f i a t s o l u b i l i t y changed wi th temperature, then v a r i o u s '1

measukements of s o l u b i l i t i e s a t d i f f e r e n t tempera tures

could be done. . .

During t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s t h e new reasoning p a t t e r n s ,

evoked dur ing concept i n t r o d u c t i o n , were given t i m e t o

s t a b i l i z e . Some s t u d e n t s need more time and more appl ica-

\ t i o n s than o t h e r s f o r t h e requ i red conceptual reorganiza-

t i o n s t o occur. The l e a r n i n g by r e p e t i t i o n and p r a c t i c e

suggested i n t h e l a s t phase would be needed i n varying

degrees by d i f f e r e n t - members o f t h e c l a s s . Each s t u d e n t

would be a b l e t o b e n e f i t from each phase accoGdipg t o h i s 1 -..3

-

needs; a l l membsrs of t h e cla;s would n o t be expected t o

complete t h e same phases of t h e c y c l e i n t h e same time. 7

The o r d e r i n which they w e r e p resen ted and exper ienced,

however, would always be t h e same. 6 ,

S e v e r a l t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s a r e necessary i f t h e

l e a r n i n g c y c l e approach i s used. S tuden t s would be given

ample o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e p e a t a c t i v i t i e s and experiments .

S t u d e n t s would b e a b l e t o p r o g r e s s through a c t i v i t i e s a t

v a r i o u s r a t e s . The s c i e n c e classroom would o f t e n c o n t a i n

s t u d e n t s engrossed i n d i f f e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s t o do w i t h t h e

same t o p i c and t e a c h e r s would be involved i n d i s c u s s i o n s

w i t h s t u d e n t s t o de termine t h e s t u d e n t s ' s t a t e of under- ..

s t a n d i n g of t h e t o p i c .

Some o t h e r i d e a s i m p l i c i t i n t h e l e a r n i n g c y c l e approach

w i l l be mentioned now. Concrete concepts would always be

in t roduced p r i o r t o formal ones. Simple exper iments would

precede more d i f f i c u l t ones. Experiences, and examples

i n l a b o r a t o r y work, d i s c u s s i o n s , and t e x t books should &--

precede concept i n t r o d u c t i o n .

S ince t h e r a t i o n a l e behind t h e t e a c h i n g c y c l e approach

was t h e i n d u c t i o n of d i s e q u i l i b r i u m i n , t h e a d o l e s c e n t s '

e x i s t i n g mental s t r u c t u r e s i n o r d e r t o cause r e p e a t e d

accommodations and e v e n t u a l a s s i m i l a t i o n of new knowledge 1 t hen s t u d e n t s ' q u a s t i o n s would r a r e l y be g iven d i r e c t yes

o r no answers t o t h e i r q u e s t i o n s . I n s t e a d , t e a c h e r s would

encourage s t u d e n t s ' q u e s t i o n s b u t they would respond t o

them w i t h f u r t h e r q u e s t i o n s aimed at, encouraging t h e

s t u d e n t s ' own t h i n k i n g a long t h e c o r r e ~ t p a t h of i n v e s t i g a - - *

t i o n about t h e problem. There would be t i m e s , however,

when d i r e c t answers would be e s s e n t i a l , such a s when a new . -% ,.

term o r d e f i n i t i o n was f o r g o t t e n . The answers t o t h a t type

of ques t ion should be answered immediately o r t h e s t u d e n t

d i r e c t e d t o a source such a s a t e x t book which would

qu ick ly provide it. The concern would be wi th encouraging

a s t u d e n t t o t h i n k and v e r b a l i z e h i s th ink ing p a t t e r n s

r a t h e r than wi th l a b e l l i n g h i s answers r i g h t o r wrong.

I n o r d e r t o encourage s t u d e n t s t o develop t h e d e s i r e d

approach t o t h e i r work, t e a c h e r s should model t h e behavior

they hoped t o promote. They should be prepared t o reason ,

o u t loud when problem s o l v i n g and when developing hypotheses

from t h e i r obse rva t ions .

According t o Schwebel and Raph (1973) , t h e t eacher who

a t t empts t o fo l low P i a g e t i a n theory "does n o t p r e s e n t ready-

made knowledge ... b u t , r a t h e r , provides o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r

t h e c h i l d t o c o n s t r u c t h i s own knowledge ... through h i s own /-

reasoning" (p .213) .

Since t h e f i r s t o b j e c t i v e of t h i s s tudy i s t o enumerate

t h e t each ing p r a c t i c e s which ~ i a g e t ' s theory of i n t e l l e c t u a l

development and P iage t -o r i en ted sc ience educa to r s cons ide r i

w i l l promote t h e development of formal-opera t ional reason- b

, - i n g p a t t e r n s , the p r a c t i c e s j u s t d i scussed i n d e t a i l w i l l

J now be summarized. 0

The i n t e n t i o n i s t o use t h e summary of s t u d e n t and

t e a c h i v i t i e s which fo l lows t o form t h e b a s i s of an

ins t rument which w i l l be developed and used i n t h i s s tudy.

The ins t rument provides a means of i d e n t i f y i n g c u r r e n t teach-

ing practices in junior secondary science classes and of

determining whether Gurrent teaching practices are similar ,

to those which are considered likely to develop the under-

lying structures of formal thought.

Suwmarv of'~eachina Practices Considered Likelv to Promote Intellectual Develo~ment

Student Activities

Students would be organized into groups so that peer

interactions and discussions of conflicting results or oppos-

ing ideas could induce sequilibrium in the students' Q existing mental structures.

Students would be able to carry out their own experi-

ments and manipulate materials since Piaget considers it

absolutely essential that students have concrete material

experiences through which they can investigate solutions to

problems.

Students would be encouraged to plzqjtheir own procedures

for investigating scientific relationships. In attempting

this, students would be applying existing knowledge and com-

paring the actual results of their experiments with those . they predicted. This would ensure that their thinking would

be more actively involved with the underlying relationships

between variables than if they always followed prepared

instructions.

S t u d e n t s would be encouraged t o make c o n c l u s i o n s o r

propose hypotheses a f t e r c a r r y i n g o u t i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o r mak-

i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s . Th i s would f o r c e s t u d e n t s t o form more

Y t i g h t l y o rgan ized menta l s t r u c t u r e s which i n c o r p o r a t e newly

l e a r n e d i d e a s w i t h p r e v i o u s l y l e a r n e d f a c t s and i d e a s .

S t u d e n t s would b e g i v e n t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e p e a t

a c t i v i t i e s and o b s e r v a t i o n s o r t o c a r r y o u t s i m i l a r a c t i v i -

t ies . Not a l l s t u d e n t s can a s s i m i l a t e new i d e a s ' i m m e d i a t e l y .

Depending on t h e i r p r e v i o u s knowledge and e x i s t i n g r eason ing

p a t t e r n s , d i f f e r e n t s t u d e n t s need va ry ing amounts o f exper-

i e n c e w i t h new i d e a s and s c i e n t i f i c p r i n c i p l e s b e f o r e t h e y

can e s t a b l i s h and s t a b i l i z e newly a c q u i r e d r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s .

For t h e same r e a s o n s s t u d e n t s would be a b l e t o p r o g r e s s a t

t h e i r own i n d i v i d u a l r a t e s th rough any p a r t i c u l a r t o p i c .

Teacher ' ~ c t i b i t i e s

A t t h e same t i m e a s t h e above a c t i v i t i e s f o r s t u d e n t s

o c c u r , t e a c h e r s would be i n c l u d i n g t h e f o l l o w i n g a c t i v i t i e s

i n t h e i r t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e . l I L

', Teachers would a s k q u e s t i o n s aimed a t de t e rmin ing t h e t"r,

q t u d e n t s ' e x i s t i n g l e v e l s o f unde r s t and ing o f a t o p i c .

During t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f new a r e a s o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n and

a t i n f e r v a l s d u r i n g i t s development t h e t e a c h e r would a s k

.. q u e s t i o n s t o gauge t h e s t u d e n t s ' l e v e l o f unde r s t and ing and

p r o g r e s s and i f necessa ry r e d i r e c t . s t u d e n t s t a c t i v i t i e s and

t h i n k i n g .

65 1

\

Teachers would a l s o a s k thought-provoking q u e s t i o n s o r

q u e s t i o n s which cou ld n o t be answered immediately by s tud -

e n t s w i t h t h e i r p r e s e n t knowledge and r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s .

These q u e s t i o n s would be des igned t o demons t r a t e t o s t u d e n t s

t h e inadequac ie s o f t h e i r e x i s t i n g t h i n k i n g p a t t e r n s s o t h a t

t h e y would r e a l i z e t h e need t o g a i n f u r t h e r knowledge and t o

t h e c a p a b i l i t i e s o f t h e i r p r e s e n t menta l s t r u c t u r e s .

d - Teachers would eqcourage s t u d e n t s t o e x p l a i n and

account f o r t h e i r o b s e r v a t i o n s . By a t t e m p t i n g t o make s e n s e V

o u t o f t h e i r measurements and o b s e r v a t i o n s s t u d e n t s deve lop

more complex r e a s o n i n g p a t t e r n s and m o r e t i g h t l y o rgan ized

unde r ly ing men ta l s t r u c t u r e s which can t h e n a s s i m i l a t e more

d i f f i c u l t i n fo rma t ion i n t h e f u t u r e . 2

CHAPTER I11

METHOD AND PROCEDURES

This chapter includes a discussion of the sample, a

description of the method ofsdata collection, and the 4

development of the instrument and its subsequent use.

The Sample

From a list of junior secondary schools in two school

districts in the lower mainland of British Columbia with

similar SES, the names of ten junior secondary schools were

randomly selected, five from each district.

Before contacting individual schools, the school

boards in each district were approached for permission to t

f , - carry out research projects in the district. A letter was

sent to each school board office with an outline of the

purpose of the study and the procedures which would be

followed in the course of its completion.

When permission was granted to approach the junior

secondary schools in each district (see Appendix A), the

principals and the science department

wereapproached and a meeting arranged

and the science staff of the school.

head in the school

between the researchers

It should be pointed

/

ri o u t a t t h i s s t a g e t h a t , a l though t h e purpose of t h i s p a r t i c - . , u l a r s tudy was t o i d e n t i f y t each ing s t r a t e g i e s m o s W c w n l y

usedoby j u n i o r secondary sc ience t e a c h e r s , t h e r e w e r e o t h e r

r e s e a r c h e r s involved i n t h e p r o j e c t who were fo l lowing

o t h e r l i n e s of i n v e s t i g a t i o n . Teachers were t h e r e f o r e being

asked t o co-operate i n a multi-purpose under taking.

A t each meeting a r e q u e s t was made t o observe and

audio-tape t h r e e normal classroom sc ience l e s sons g iven by

each of t h e t e a c h e r s o f s c i e n c e i n t h e school . I n t h i s way

it was hoped t o r ecord bhe a c t i v i t i e s of a sample of a t

l e a s t 30 t e a c h e r s g i v i n g . l e s s o n s i n jun io r secondary sc ience

classrooms. When reques ted , a n ' o u t l i n e o f t h e purposes of

t h e p r o j e c t (see Appendix B ) was made a v a i l a b l e t o t h e

' t eachers s o t h a t they had some ide.a of t h e a r e a s of i n t e r e s t

of t h e r e s e a r c h e r s .

When t e a c h e r s i n schoo l s which were i n i t i a l l y randomly

s e l e c t e d were unable t o co-operate , more schoo l s w e r e ran-

domly selecte 'd from each school d i s t r i c t . The same

approaches t o sc ience s t a f f w e r e made through t h e p r i n c i p a l s

and s c i e n c e department heads u n t i l e v e n t u a l l y most jun io r

secondary schoo l s i n both d i s t r i c t s had been approached.

By then it was near t h e end of t h e 1978-79 school y e a r when

school schedules were be ing d i s r u p t e d , s o f u r t h e r approaches

were delayed u n t i l t h e beginning of t h e nex t schoo l yea r . A t

t h a t t ime, ano the r school d i s t r i c t was approached i n an a t -

tempt t o i n c r e a s e t h e number of t e a c h e r s i n t h e sample from

1 8 t o 3 0 .

C o l l e c t i o n of t h e Data

I n each of t h e co-operat ing schoo l s , t i m e s convenient

f o r t h e g a r t i c i p a t i n g t e a c h e r s were arranged, i n which

obse rve rs went i n t o classrooms t o audio-tape and observe

three ' r e g u l a r t each ing l e s sons pe r t eacher . I t was reques ted

t h a t t h e l e s s o n s being recorded involve a s near t o normal

procedures a s t h e presence of observeirs would al low. Les-

sons which were wholly occupied by t e s t s were n o t observed

and wi th in each schoo l a range of grade e i g h t , n ine and t e n

l e s s o n s were s e l e c t e d whenever p o s s i b l e .

I n a d d i t i o n t o audio-taping each l e s son , t h e obse rve rs

were reques ted t o keep a w r i t t e n record of t h e a c t i v i t i e s

and movements which occurred i n t h e classroom. I t was

a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t any s i l e n c e s o r ambigu i t i e s on t h e audio-

t a p e s would then be understood bye r e f e r e n c e t o t h e record

s h e e t s when they were coded a t some l a t e r d a t e . D e t a i l s

of blackboard work, t e x t book r e f e r e n c e s and l a b o r a t o r y

a c t i v i t i e s , which would n o t be recorded on t h e t a p e , were

a l s o noted.

The Development of t h e Ins t rument /

Herber t and A t t r i d g e (1975) i n t h e i r guide f o r t h e

developers of obse rva t ion systems warned t h a t "with s o many

systems. e x t a n t which a r e under-developed and underused, one

69

needs good reasons f o r t h e c r e a t i o n of new ones p a r t i c u l a r l y

where they resemble ins t ruments a l r eady i n e x i s t e n c e " ( p . 5 ) .

Consequently, a thorough sea rch was made f o r a coding

schedule which focused o n , t h e teaching p r a c t i c e s of i n t e r -

es t i n t h i s s tudy. They inc luded a c t i v i t i e s of both t h e

t eacher and t h e s t u d e n t , some o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a s p e c t s of t h e

l e s sons and some c o g n i t i v e a s p e c t s of t h e s c i e n c e teaching.

S ince a c t i v i t i e s i n sc ience classrooms a r e o f t e n q u i t e

d i f f e r e n t from a c t i v i t i e s i n o t h e r classrooms i t was con-

s i d e r e d t h a t on ly a schedule s p e c i a l l y designed f o r coding

occurrences i n s c i e n c e classrooms would be appropr ia te .

A sea$L-through Simon and Boyer (1970). which l i s t e d

79 systems developed i n t h e United S t a t e s f o r observing

classroom behaviour, r evea led only four which w e r e r e l e v a n t

t o sc ience classrooms. None of them were r e a d i l y adap tab le

t o coding t each ing p r a c t i c e s which were r e l a t e d t o t h e i - -

development o f formal reasoning. The Science Observat ion

System developed by Altman came c l o s e s t t o t h e needs of P

t h i s s tudy s i n c e it covered procedures and r o u t i n e s used i n

sc ience c l a s s e s b u t , a s it conta ined both c o g n i t i v e and

a f f e c t i v e behaviours , it was n o t usable here .

A f u r t h e r s e a r c h of t h e l i t e r a t u r e r evea led only a few

schedules s p e c i f i c a l l y designed f o r classroom obse rva t ion .

One produced by F i s c h l e r and Z i m m e r (1968) was developed t o

enable i t s au thors t o c l a s s i f y teaching techniques observed

-7 i n sc ience classrooms. By t each ing technique they meant

i

any a c t i v i t y which t h e t e a c h e r c a r r i e d o u t s p e c i f i c a l l y t o

promote l e a r n i n g i n t h e classroom. Even though i t s aim was

' t o c l a s s i f y t e a c h i n g on a v e r b a l o r do ing l e v e l o r accord-

i n g t o whether t h e s t u d e n t s a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n s c i e n c e

a c t i v i t i e s , 'it cou ld n o t be adapted t o t h e needs o f t h i s 0

s t u d y . \

J Galton and Eggles ton (1975) , working i n t h e United

Kingdom, developed a s c i e n c e t each ing o b s e r v a t i o n system

t o measure how t e a c h e r s d i f f e r e d i n t h e i r behaviour i n

s c i e n c e c lass rooms. T h e i r s c h e d u l e , however, was d i r e c t e d

o n l y a t t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a n s a c t i o n s which took p l a c e dur-

i n g s c i e n c e l e s s o n s (Gal ton & Eggles ton , 1979, p . 7 6 ) .

F i n a l l y , s i n c e no s u i t a b l e e x i s t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n sched-

u l e was found, one w a s developed s p e c i f i c a l l y t o m e e t t h e

needs of t h i s s tudy . S i n c e an o b j e c t i v e o f t h e s t u d y was

t o compare c u r r e n t t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s w i t h P iage t -de r ived

t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s t h e schedu le was based on t h o s e p r a c t i c e s ,

r - ." summarized a t t h e end o f t h e p rev ious c h a p t e r , cons ide red &"

l i k e l y t o a i d i n t h e development of formal r eason ing . The

main f e a t u r e s o f t h e i t e m s used i n t h e f i n a l form of t h e

i n s t r u m e n t are l i s t e d i n able 4 . The i t e m s w e r e o rgan ized

i n t o s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s and t e a c h e r a c t i v i t i e s . Each

o f t h e s e were f u r t h e r d i v i d e d acco rd ing t o whether t h e

a c t i v i t y was cons ide red l i k e l y o r u n l i k e l y t o promote t h e

development o f r eason ing p a t t e r n s . Those

i t e m s l i s t e d under s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s and numbered S1 t o S6

,g Q A.

r e p r e s e n t e d a c t i v i t i e s cons ide red l i k e l y t o a i d i n t h e de-

Table 4

Science Teaching Observation Instrument I tems

STUDENT ACTIVITIES

Students :

Work i n groups s o t h a t they can d i s c u s s t h e i r a c t i v i - t ies , r e s u l t s , id.eas.

Plan t h e i r own procedures f o r c a r r y i n g o u t l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s .

Discuss t h e i r observat ions , , o r a p p l i c a t i o n s of a new concept, wi th t h e i r pee r s be fo re a t t empt ing t o answer t e x t book ques t ions .

Make conclus ions o r propose hypotheses about observa- t i o n s made dur ing l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s .

Manipulate appara tus themselves. They set up t h e i r m a t e r i a l s , do t h e i r own labora to ry work, use micro- scopes , e t c .

Repeat o r extend t h e i r obse rva t ions a f t e r d i s c u s s i n g t h e i r conclus ions wi th t h e i r pee r s o r t h e t eacher . May be a r e p e t i t i o n of an a c t i v i t y t o i n c r e a s e f a m i l i a r i t y wi th a new concept.

I n a c l a s s a l l do t h e same a c t i v i t i e s i n a l e s son . The whole c l a s s p rogresses through a t o p i c a t t h e same r a t e .

Follow t e x t book i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r l a b d r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s . ( o r fo l low a procedure w r i t t e n o u t by t h e t e a c h e r on t h e blackboard, hand-out s h e e t , e tc . )

~ 9 Y w r i t e answers t o q u e s t i o n s from t h e t e x t book on t h e i r . own - without any d i s c u s s i o n wi th p e e r s o r t e a c h e r - OR do

l a b wri te-ups on t h e i r own.

S10. U s e a lgor i thms t o f i n d answers t o problems, e .g. a r e t a u g h t how t o manipulate a formula such a s D = M/V t o f i n d an unknown q u a n t i t y .

S11. U s e memorised m a t e r i a l , e .g. d e f i n i t i o n s , va lence and apply them wi thout n e c e s s a r i l y understanding them.

Table 4 (Cont 'd)

TEACHER ACTIVITIES

Teacher :

Asks q u e s t i o n s t o determine t h e p u p i l ' s l e v e l of unders tandins o f a t o p i c - whole c l a s s , ind i ' v idua l ly - o r i n groups.

Asks q u e s t i o n s which a r e thought provoking and desiuned t o arouse t h e c u r i o s i t y o f s t u d e n t s o r desi&ned t o make s t u d e n t s aware - tha t t h e r e a r e s t i l l ,

2

t h i n g s they cannot e x p l a i n wi th t h e i r p r e s e n t know- . . ledge o f a t o p i c .

Encourages s t u d e n t s t o v e r b a l l y e x p l a i n , - . o r account f o r , o r make sense of t h e i r o b s e r v a t i o n s made.during a l a b a c t i v i t y .

I n t e r a c t s wi th i n d i v i d u a l s o r smal l groups t o ask q u e s t i o n s , check s t u d e n t s ' p r o g r e s s , become aware of t h e reasoning p a t t e r n s t h e y - a r e us ing .

Talks t o , l e c t u r e s , o r c l a i m s a t t e n t i o n of whole c l a s s a t once. Lesson c o n s i s t s ' m a i n l y o f t e a c h e r t a l k .

Demonstrates s c i e n t i f i c p r i n c i p l e s by manipula t ing appara tus himself (demonstrat ing a new technique n o t inc luded) . T e l l s c l a s s i n advance t h e concept o r r u l e - t h a t they a r e going t o "prove" , e .g. Today w e a r e going t o observe t h a t . . . withdraws from i n t e r a c t i o n s wi th class and -3imply superv i ses s t u d e n t s ,with no v e r b a l i n t e r a c t i o n s excep t t o mainta in d i s c i p l i n e . .

velopment o f more complex r eason ing s t r u c t u r e s from s imple r

ones . I t e m s numbered S7 t o S 1 1 d e s c r i b e d s t u d e n t a c t i v i -

t i e s l e s s l i k e l y t o promote s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n . S i m i l a r l y ,

i n t h e s e c t i o n which focused on t e a c h e r a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e

s c i e n c e c lass room, i t e m s T 1 t o T4 w e r e a c t i v i t i e s cons ide red "0,

l i k e l y t o cause d i s e q u i l i b r i u m i n s t u d e n t s ' t h i n k i n g p a t -

t e r n s and t h e r e b y cause t h e development of more complex

s t r u c t u r e s . I t e m s T5 t o T8 , however; a c t i v i t i e s which f

w e r e .consi 'dered less l i k e l y t o . i n d u c e sel - r e g u l a t i o n . 9 V a l i d i t y of t h e Ins t rumen t

V a l i d i t y r e f e r s t o t h e degree t o which t h e measures

o b t a i n e d by an i n s t r u m e n t a c t u a l l y d e s c r i b e what t h e y pur-

p o r t t o d e s c r i b e .

7

V a l i d i t y c r i t e r i a i n c l u d e t h o s e whi& pe r - t a i n t o t h e o b s e r v a b i l i t y of b e h a v i o r s , t o t h e o b j e c t i v i t y o f t h e incs t r&nen t , akd t h e r e l a t e d prablems o f in'ference; c o n t e x t and o b s e r v e r e f f e c t s , t o c t h e r e p r e s e n t q t i v e n e s s of i n s t r u m e n t i t e m s o f t h e b e h a v i e r s under s t u d y , and t o t h e de te rminakion And r e p o r t - o

i n g o f r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d a t i o n procedures . - ( H e r b e r t & A t t r i d g e , 1975, p.6)

~' 1. F i r s t t h e o b s e r v a b i l i t y o f t h e s t u d e n t and t e a c h e r

a c t i v i t i e s was examined. Most o f t h e s e w e r e d i r e c t l y obser -

v a b l e and w e r e t h e r e f o r e -Tow lLnFerenE i € e m s r For-z3mnplej

t h e s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s numbered S5 and 58, which r e q u i r e d

t h e o b s e r v e r t o d e c i d e whether t h e s t u d e n t s w e r e manipulat-

i n g m a t e r i a l s t hemse lves%and fo l lowing t e s t book i n s t r u c - b

-'l t i o n s w h i l e do ing so , were e a s y t o observe and r e c o r d %cur-

a t e l y . S t u d e n t a c t i v i t y i t e m S 3 , however, promised t o be'

more d i f f i c u l t t o code, p a r t i c u l a r l y i f s t u d e n t s w e r e c a r r y - ! a \

i n 6 o u t l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s . DiscussiOns might be occur - \ \

r i n g b u t 'it would n o t a lways be e a s y t o judge whether t h e i

t o p i c s be ing d i s c u s s e d were c e n t r e d on t h e s c i e n c e a c t i v i t y

o r something else. I f t h e t e a c h e r d e l i b e r a t e l y o rgan ized

h i s c l a s s t o encourage t h e d i s c u s s i o n of s c i e n c e a c t i v i t i e s

t h e coding woul'd be s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d . I n most cases., however,

it was a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e coding of any s t u d e n t d i s c u s s i o n s

would invo lve modera te ly h l g h i n f e r e n c e judgements.

Conten t v a l i d i t y of t h e i n s t r u m e n t was e s t a b l i s h e d by

s e e k i n g a" judgement of t h e i t e m s i t inc luded from a s c i e n c e

e d u c a t o r and h e r g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t . Both p e r s o n s w e r e

conve r san t w i t h t h e i n t e n t of t h e coding sche&le ahd had

c l o s e l y fo l lowed t h e 1% t e r a t u r e rev iew which ,had l e d to. t h e *

s e l e c t i o n of t h e i t e m s i t c o n t a i n e d . ' A t r i a l coding s e s s i o n

u s i n g a randomly s e l e c t e d l e s s o n l e d t o a l t e r a t i o n o f t h e

wording of s e v e r a l o f t h e i t e m s i n t h e i n s t rum&t . Subse-*

quen t . r ecod ings o f t h e same l e s s o n by an independent code r

w e r e used t o a s c e r t a i n whether t h e r e v i s e d wording o f t h e

i t e m s d i d i n c r e a s e t h e c o n s i s t e n ~ y and accu racy w i t h which

t h e i n s t r u m e n t cou ld be used. The f i n a l form of t h e i n s t r u - - - - - -

ment whiqh r e s u l t e d i s i n c l u d e d i n Appendix C.

The Coding Method Used on t h e Instrument -- --

I n s t r u m e n t s for observinq c ' o n t i n u ~ n q c Lassroom e v e n t s

may employ e i t h e r s i g n or c a t e g o r y r e c o r d i n y p r o c e d u r e s i

(Bor i ch , 1 9 7 7 ) . A s i g n system r e c o r d s an e v e n t o n l y once

i n a g iven t i m e i n t e r v a l r e q a r d l e s s of how o f t e n i t o c c u r s ,

whereas a ateg gory sys tem r e c o r d s a g iven behav iou r each

t i m e i t a p p e a r s and hence p r o v i d e s a f requency coun t of t h e

occu r r ence of s p e c i f i c behav iou r s . S i n c e some o f the

a c t i v i t i e & i n t h e i n s t r u m e n t developediQin t h i s s t u d y w e r e 8"

modera te ly h igh i n f e r e n c e b e h a v i o u r s , ' it ' was d e c i d e d ' t o use

i n g i t t o code a , l esson . When u s i n g t h i s i n s t r u m e n t , t h e

ceders w e r e r e q u i r e d t o make a judgemept, on a 1 t o 5 s c a l e ,

of t h e deg ree t o which each behaviour o c c u r r e d d u r i n g e a c h

nine-minute segment ' of t h e l e s s o n .

-%- t h e a c t i v i t y d i d n o t occu r d u r i n g any nine-minute

X ' i n t e r 1, t h e n column 1 was checked. If t h e behav iou r

o c c u r r e d a t l e a s t once column 2 was checked, whereas i f i t

occupied app rox ima te ly 'ha l f o f t h a t t i m e i n t e r v a l , cdlumn 3

modif ied s i g n sys t em, known a s a r a t i n < - s y s t e m , when employ- 3

i 1 +

i 5 * i 1 f P

f 2 4 f

f 1

%

was checked. Column 4 was used whenever a behav iou r h .

o c c u r r e d rpost o f t h e t i m e . Column 5 was checked whenever ff

an a c t i v i t y c o n t i n u e d t&oughout t h e e n t i r e nine-minute

even though i t o n l y o c c u r r e d once o r t w i c e ) .

d

R e l i a b i l i t y of t h e I n s t r u m e n t d * $

To d e t e r m i n e t h e r e l i a b i l i t y of t h e i n s t k m e n t , t h a t

i s , t h e c o n s i s t e n c y w i t h which i t was c a p a b l e o f measuxing

t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f t i m e % s p e n t on e a c h a c t i v i t y , a n o t h e r

g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t was a s k e d t o code t w a randomly s e l e c t e d

l e s s o n s . A f t e r i n s t r u c t i o n was g i v e n i n t h e u s e o f t h e 0

s c h e d u l e , t h e c o d i n g was c a r r i e d o u t . To measure t h e c o r r e -

l a t i o n between t h e judgements of t h e two r a t e r s , K e n d a l l ' s t a u

was c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g t h e c o r r e c t i o n for t i e d o b s e r v a t i o n s .

The c o r r e l a t i o n s o b t a i n e d w e r e . 6 6 and . 7 7 .

Method o f C a l c u l a t i n g I t e m S c o r e s on t h e I n s t r u m e n t

Each o f t h e columns 1 t o 5 on t h e s c i e n c e t e a c h i n g

p r a c t i c e s i n s t r u m e n t wa ss i -gned a n u m e r i c a l r a t i n g o f

0 t o 4 r e s p e c t i v e l y . T r a t i n g w a s t h e n m u l t i p l i e d by d-

t h e number o f t i m e s t h e lumn was checked d u r i n g a l e s s o n .

i The numbers t h u s o b t a i n & d i n e a c h colurnnJwere surnrqed a c r o s s

\-& L e a c h i t e m t o g i v e a t o t a l s c o r e f o r e a c h i t e m f o r e Q

l e s s o n . A sample i t e m s c o r e c a l c u l a t i o n i s se t o u t i n

T a b l e 5 . The t o t a l s c o r e f o r a n i t e m c o u l d v a r y f rom 0,

f o r a n a c t i v i t y which d i d n o t o c c u r a t a l l d u r i n g a l e s s q n ,

t o 2 4 f o r a n a c t i v i t y which o c c u r r e d c o n t i n u o u s l y t h r o u g h o u t

t h e whole l e s s o n and was t h e r e f o r e checked s i x t i m e s f o r \

t h e l e s s o n .

C a l c u l a t i o n of I t e m Sco re

Column

Numerical v a l u e 0 1 2 3 4

b P ,, -8 % I t e m T5 J J Jd T o t a l

Sco re ( 3 ) + ( 2 x 4 ) = ----

Method o f Analysing t h e Data

I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f Teaching Types According t o Frequency o f Occurrence o f A c t i v i t i e s .

One purpose of t h i s s t u d y was t o i d e n t i f y t e a c h i n g 4 -a ", %- A'

p r a c t i c e s p r e s e n t l y be ing used i n j u n i o r secondary s c i e n c e

c lass rooms s o t h a t ' t h e y cou ld be compared w i t h P i a g e t i a n -

d e r i v e d p%qctices. The concern was w i t h how t e a c h e r s w e r e

.I o r g a n i z i n g t h e i r s t u d e n t s and i n what a c t i v i t i e s t h e teach- 1

3 , e r s and s t u d e n t s were engaged. The d a t a c o l l e c t e d w e r e 4

r!

aimed a t p roducing a f requency Count of such behav iou r s from f *

which a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e t e a c h e r and s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s

i n t h e c lass room cou ld b e drawn. , The a n a l y s i s o f t h e d a t a . L

t h e r e f o r e r e q u i r e d methods which would e n a b l e common teach- , -

i n g s t y l e s o r t y p e s t o be identified based on t h e f requency

of u s e o f t h e a c t i v i t i e s l i s t e d i n t h e s c h e d u l e .

A s a f i r s t s t e p i n t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of t y p e s o f

t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s o r o v e r a l l t egch ing s t r a t e g i e s used by

t h e t e a c h e r s i n t h i s sample , grouped f requency d i s t r i b u t i o n

g raphs w e r e c o n s t r u c t e d for each t e a c h e r f o r e a c h l e s s o n .

These were i n t e n d e d t o s e r v e s e v e r a l pu rposes . They a l lowed c,'--. L

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t e a c h i n g t y p e s which had c o m m o n ~ ~ u d e n t

and t e a c h e r a c t i v i t i e s . They al lowed t h e number o f t e a c h e r s

who used each t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g y t o be de te rmined . They

showed whether a t e a c h e r c o n s i s t e n t l y used t h e same t each - ', *

a t e g i e s . F i n a l l y , t h e y a l lowed a comparison o f t h e

teaFc!drs1 c u r r e n t p r a c t i c e s w i t h t h e P i a g e t i a n - d e r i v e d

p r a c t i c e s i d e n t i f i e d from t h e l i t e r a t u r e .

For t h e purpose o f c o n s t r u c t i n g t h e s e g raphs t h e t o t a l

s c o r e s computed f o r e a c h i t e m i n a w h o l e ~ l e s s o n w e r e d i v i d e d 6 nFJ

%\ i n t o f o u r a r b i t r a r y c a t e g o r i e s . I f t h e t o t a l s c o r e o f an : t . I U i t e m was between 16 and 2 4 , it was c o n s i d e r e d t o have a h i g h g

f requency of o c c u r r e n c e . I f t h e t o t a l s c o r e was between i- J

% 7 and 1 5 , i t s o c c u r r e n c e was c o n s i d e r e d ' t o be moderate . 6

A s c o r e o f 1 t o 6 d u r i n g a l e s s o n was t a k e n t o i n d i c a t e a

r F

low f requency o f o c c u r r e n c e . I f t h e a c t i v i t y d i d n o t occu r ,

i t s f requency was z e r o and a f p u x t h c a t e g o r y was used t o %

i n d i c a t e i t s absence .

S i n c e a f requency o f o c c u r r e n c e of e a c h a c t i v i t y was

de te rmined f o r e a c h l e s s o n , t h e n t h e mean of t h i s f r equency

. w a s c a l c u l a t e d f o r e a c h i t e m w i t h i n each t e a c h i n g t y p e -

i d e n t i f i e d by t h e method j u s t o u t l i n e d . F u r t h e r , a n o v e r a l l i

mean was c a l c u l a t e d f o r each i t e m f o r a l l l e s s o n s coded 1 3

i b u t b e f o r e t h e s e means cou ld be compared w i t h a mea f o r 1 i

\ a P i a g e t i a n - o r i e n t e d t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g y , i t had t o e d e r i v e d .

i j Frequency of Occurrence o f P i a g e t i a n - d e r i v e d A c t i v i t i e s 1

i 1

i Not a l l t h e a c t i v i t i e s l i s t e d a n t h e s c h e d u l e ( a s

d e s i r a b l e f o r promoting formal t hough t ) cou ld o c c u r c o n t i n -

uous ly f o r a whole l e s s o n . For example, t h e a c t i v i t y i n i t e m

5 4 , which r e f e r r e d t o s t u d e n t s making c o n c l u s i o n s o r propos- f 2 Z

i n g t h e i r own hypo theses , cou ld n o t occupy a n e n t i r e l e s s o n . 3 3

I t e m S5, however, which r e f e r s t o t h e t i m e d u r i n g which 3 I

s t u d e n t s se t up and use t h e i r own a p p a r a t u s , cou ld occu r 4

t h roughou t a whole l e s s o n . I n o r d e r t o a l l o w f o r t h e s e

d i f f e r e n c e s i t was d e c i d e d t h a t some measure o f optimum

f requency of o c c u r r e n c e o f e a c h a c t i v i t y was needed. t 1

\ Accord ing ly , s e v e r a l e d u c a t o r s and s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s !

w e r e approached f o r t h e i r judgement o f t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f i t i m e which cou ld be occup ied by each s t u d e n t and t e a c h e r 1

i a c t i v i t y l i s t e d on t h e - s c h e d u l e o v e r a p e r i o d o f t h r e e I

i 1

r o u t i n e l e s s o n s (see Appe Tx . For t h e pu rposes of t h i s i e x e r c i s e each pe r son was asked t o c o n s i d e r t h a t i t e m s Sq i t o S6 and T 1 t o T4 c o n s t i t u t e d a d e s i r a b l e t e a c h i n g p rac -

ry - - - -

1 3

t i c e and t h a t t h e i t e m s S7 t o S11 and T5 t o T8 c o n s t i t u t e d 1 u n d e s i r a b l e t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s when. t e a c h i n g t o promote

fo rma l r ea son ing p a t t e r n s . From t h e i r r e s p o n s e s a mean

f requency of occu r rence f o r each i t e m was c a l c u l a t e d . I t

was used f o r comparison w i t h t h e means o f t h e o t h e r teach-

i n g s t y l e s i d e n t i f i e d i n t h i s s t u d y .

t

The t y p e s o f t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s i d e n t i f i e d by t h i s

method o f a n a l y s i s and t h e i r comparison w i t h p i a g e t i a n -

d e r i v e d p r a c t i c e s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e n e x t c h a p t e r .

CHAPTER I V

RESULTS , ._

This c h a p t e r t h e r e s u l t s of t h e s t u d y . The

sample i s d s s c r i b e d f i r s t , t hen t h e t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s a s

r eco rded by the o b s e r v a t i o n schedu le a r e examined. - F i n a l l y ,

t h e t y p e s o f t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s commonly found t o be used

by t h i s sample of t e a c h e r s a r e compared w i t h t h e P i a g e t i a n -

t y p e p r a c t i c e s d e r i v e d from the ' l i t e r a t u r e .

The Sample

B

Before' t h e end of t h e 1978-79 s c h o o l yea r , . t h e s c i e n c e

s t a f f s i n . t w e l v e j u n i o r secondary s c h o o l s had been approached

w i t h r e q u e s t s t o a l l ow o b s e r v a t i o n s o f s c i e n c e l e s s o n s , , i n

t h e i r c lass rooms. From t h e s i x schools. 'which agr'eed t o par -

t i c i p a t e i n t h e s t u d y , 18 t e a c h e r s w e r e o b t a i n e d a s t h e

f i n a l sample. The t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s o f each o f t h e s e

t e a c h e r s w e r e observed and audio- taped on t h r e e s e p a r a t e

o c c a s i o n s r e s u l t i n g i n 52 coded l e s s o n s .

Of t h e 18 f e a c h e r s i n t h e sample, 16 had t a k e n s c i e n c e

t e a c h i n g methodology c o u r s e s and 17 had t aken more than

e i g h t c o u r s e s . a r i n g t K e i r t e a c h e r ErainlLng-. As shown iP1

Table 6 , a l l b u t two o f t H e t e a c h e r s had a t l e a s t f o u r

,464

y e a r s ' s c i e n c e t e a c h i n g expe r i ence and had been t e a c h i n g C-

e x p e r i e n c e and had been t e a c h i n g s c i e n c e th roughout t h e i r

c a r e e r s .

Table 6 ' '

Exper ience of Teachers

Number o f t e a c h e r s

Years o f expe r i ence Any t e a c h i n g Sc ience teach5ng

Types of Teaching P r a c t i c e s I d e n t i f i e d i n t h e Sample

h

A s e x p l a i n e d i n t h e p rev ious c h a p t e r , grouped frequency \

d i s t r i b u t i o n graphs w e r e c o n s t r u c t e d f o r each l e s s o n f o r

each t e a c h e r . An examina t ion of t h e s e graphs (see Appen- -

d i x E ) i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e w e r e b a s i c a l l y t h r e e d i f f e r e n t

t y p e s of t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s b e b g used i n junior secondary

s c i e n c e c lass rooms i n t h e sample. The f i r s t s t r a t e g y

i d e n t i f i e d (Type I ) ~ e s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by s t u d e n t i nvo lve -

3

- 4@

ment i n a l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t y which was c a r r i e d o u t accord- ,

i n g t o t e x t book i n s t r u c t i o n s and f o r which a w r i t t e n v -

r e p o r t was expec t ed . The second p r a c t i c e (Type 11)

t y p i c a l l y i nvo lved a t e a c h e r demons t r a t i on o f s c i e n t i f i c ,

I

phenomena and inc luded a

which t h e t e a c h e r t a l k e d

(Type I I I ) , however, was

l a r g e amount o f l e s s o n t i m e i n

t o t h & c l a s s . The t h i r d -

i d e n t i f i e d by an absence o f s t u d e n t

and t e a c h e r l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t y . I n s t e a d , i k i n c l u d e d a

moderate amount of t e a c h g r t a l k coupled w i t h s t u d e n t w r i t t e n - -

work, s o l v i n g problems , o r a p p l y i n g r e c e n t l y l e a r n e d s c i e n c e

p r i n c i p l e s . The f requency d i s t r i b u t i o n s of s t u d e n t and - t e a c h e r a c t i v i t i e s - c o d e d i n each of t h e s e t e a c h i n g t y p e s

( s e e F igu re 1) a r e now d e s c r i b e d i n more d e t a i l .

Type I : Labogatory Ac t iv i t y /Wr i t e -up S t y l e

I n t h i s * t ype of l e s s o n , which o c c u r r e d i n 2 6 o f t h e -

52 l e s s o n s coded, a l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t y o c c u r r e d which

i nvo lved a l l s t u d e n t s f o r a t l e a s t f i f t e e n minu te s o f tlie .'

l e s s o n ( s e e I t e m S5, Teachin? ~ y p e I , F i g . 1 ) . I n t h e s e ?

l e s s o n s a l l s t u d e n t s i n t h e c lass room worked a t t h e same

'. a c t i v i t y and fo l lowed d i r e c t i o n s f o r t h e a c t i v i t y e i t h e r a .

from t h e t e x t book or from i n s t r u c t i o n s p rov ided by t h e -- 3

t e a c h e r on an overhead p r o j e c t o r o r a b l ackboa rd . On com- - p l e t i n g t h e a c t i v i t i e s o u t l i n e d f o r them, s t u d e n t s t h e n

commenced w r i t e - u p s o f t h e a c t i v i t j e s (see I t e m S 9 ) , a g a i n :

fo l lowing text-book i n s t r u c t i o n s . I f the t e x t asked q u e s t i o n s t

, a b o u t t h e a c t i v i t i e s j u s t done, t hen s t u d e n t s were r e q u i r e d

t o i n c l u d e w r i t t e n answers to t h e q u e s t i o n s i n t h e i r w r i t e - +--.

ups. During t h e s e s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s t h e t e a c h e r sometimes - . walked around q u e s t i o n i n g o r h e l p i n g i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t s .

I n 7 of t h e s e l e s sons , , t e a c h e r i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h s tude 'n t s - d

occur red o f t e n enough f o r t h e t o t a l f requency s c o r e o f t h a t i

, t e a c h e r a c t i v i t y i t e m t o be h i g h e3ough t o be c o n s i d e r e d a s

i

P o c c u r r i n g modera te ly o f t e n . t

f -

I n 4 of t h e s e l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t y - o r i e n t e d l e s s o n s , t h e ? ,. .." , I

t e a c h e r d i s c u s s e d t h e s t u d e n t s ' c o n c l u s i o n s wi th ' t h e whole \ !.

c l a s s and a t t empted t o e l i c i t hypotheses from t h e s t u d e n t s

a b o u t t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s . I n t h e o t h e r 2 2 l e s s o n s of t h i s - t y p e , c o n c l u s i o n s and h y p o t h e s i s were n o t d i s c u s s e d . '

T

5

Type I1 : ' ~ e a c h e r Talk/Demonstration S t y l e '

M

a- . i T - L his type o f t e a c h i n g was d h a r a c t e r i z e d by two t e a c h e r -2 Zr

. a c t i v i t i e s which o c c u r r e d f r e q u e n t l y d u r i n g each l e s s o n . The

t e a c h e r occupied a l a r g e amount o f t i m e d u r i n g t h e l e s s o n 2

t a l k i n g t o t h e c l a s S and c l a i m i n g t h e a t t e n t i o n o f t h e who16 4, 1 c l a s s (see I t e m T5, Teaching Type 11, F i g u r e 1). During

some of t h i s t i m e t h e t e a c h e r demons t ra ted c9emica1"readtions - i ;E 5-

o r s c i e n t i f i c p r i n c i p l e s by hand l ing and manipulating appara- 4 9,

. i

t u s (see I t e m T6, Teaching Type 11, Figure 1). S t u d e n t s i n - 4 A 3

t h e s e l e s s o n s s a t i n t h e i r s e a t s e i t h e r l i s t e n i n g t o e v e n t s 4

be ing d e s c r i b e d o r r e c o r d i n g d e t a i l s and o b s e r v a t i o n s o f t h e t

t e a c h e r ' 6 demons t r a t i on a s d i r e c t e d by t h e t e a c h e r ; t h e y . .

had no opport ;ni ty t o c a r r y o u t t h e r d a c t i o n , 'or handle t h e II*_

a p p a r a t u s , themselves . . Any l e s s o n s i n whiCh s t u d e n t s -

c a r r i e d o u t t h e i r own a c t i v i t i e s w e r e n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h i s

t e a c h i n g s t y l e even when t h e r e may have been demons t r a t i on " f

a c t i v i t i e s c a r r i e d p o u t b y q t h e teacGer i n t h e lesson-.

The low f requency s c o r e s f o r items T 1 to T3 (Teaching

Type 11, F i g u r e 1) show t h a t t e a c h e r s who used t h i s t e a c h i n g

s t y l e i n t h e i r t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s d i d n o t o o f t e n ask q u e s t i o n s iJ

of s t u d e n t s ; v e r b a l i n t e r a c t i o n s between t e a c h e r and stydedts /

w e r e few ( I t e m T4) . F u r t h e r , - t e a c h e r s u s i n g t h i s s ty l e

r a r e l y a t t empted t o e l i c i t c ~ n c l u s i o n s a b o u t t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s

from t h e s t u d e n t s ; I t e m T3 o c c u r r e d i n 1 of t h e 6 l e s s o n s

1 c a t e g o r i z e d a s Type 11.

Type 111 : Teacher ~ a l k / ~ ; u d e n t d i t t e n Problem Work S t y l e

This t y p e o f t e a c h i n g invo lved n e i t h e r ' l a b o r a t o r y I(

a c t i v i t i e s c a r r i e d o u t by s t u d e n t s , n o r demons t r a t i ons done

by t h e t e a c h e r . I n s t e a d , t h e l e s s o n s w e r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d by

f r e q u e n t t e a c h e r t a l k (see,I tem T5, Teaching Type 111, Fig-

u r e 1) and s t u d e n t s spending a moderake p r o p o r t i o n of t h e - 2 ., l e s s o n t i m e do ing w r i t t e n answers to text-book problems o r -

-

q u e s t i o n s i n v o l v i n g rece .n t ly l e a r n e d s c i e n t i f i c p r i n c i p l e s 0

e

(see I t e m s 5 9 , l o , 11, F i g u r e 1) :" ~ e a c h e & ueed t h i s t ype of ,P

t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e i n 20 -of t h e 5 2 d s s o n s c -->

S t u d e n t s i n t h e s e l e s s o n s w e r e a l l expec t ed t o b e

do ing t h e same work and p r o g r e s s i n g through a t o p i c . a t t h e

same r a t e . Teachers s p e n t - v e r y l i t t l e t i m e q u e s t i o n i n g

s t u d e n t s , e i t h e r i n d i v i d u a l l y or a s a whole class.'

Table 7 shows t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e c u r r e n t t kach ink t , .

i X i s d i > A h U - a ~ b ~ ! - _ g r a " c a , e b v e $ of thp - . - - t i y p e s i dent -

I s t u d e n t s i n t h e s c i e n c e classes. The Labora to ry A c t i v i t y /

Write-up (Type I ) p r a c t i c e occu r red more f r e q u e n t l y w i t h 8

. grade e i g h t and n i n e classes t h a n w i t h g r a d e t e n c l a s s e s .

Grade t e n c l a s s e s w e r e more f r e q u e n t l y observed do ing prob- *

l e m s o l v i n g a c t i v i t i e s , o r l i s t e n i n g t o t h e t e a c h e r t a l k

i t

i n g t y p e s and b o t h o f t h o s e t e a c h e r s w e r e observed qeaching /

al;l t h r e e - l e s s o n s t o t h e s a m e g r a d e l e v e l - of s t u d e n t s . -- - - - - - - - - -

2

, Table 8

D i s t r i b u t i o n of Type nd Grade Lev& by Tea d e r

Type , Grade ~ e v e i Teacher I I1 111 8 ' 9 . 1 0

* 1 lesson n o t coded.

- - pp - -&--- -

Having ' desc r ibed c u r r e n t teaching p r a c t i c e s i n t h e

jun io r secondary sc ience c l a s s e s sampled, t h e t h i r d objec-

t i v e of t h i s s tudy can b o u t ; t h e observed prac-

t i c e s can be compared p r a c t i c e s

de r ived from t h e . l i t e r a t u r e .

Discussion of Means of Student and Teacher A c t i v i t v Items '

The are-e- teach ' ng types d i scussed d e s c r i b e t h e teach- t i n g p r a c t i c e s which weke observed i n t h e jun io r secondary

sc ience classrooms i n t h i s sample. Tables 9 and 10 show t h e

* 9 >

means of t h e f requenc ies of occ r rence of each of t h e

s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s and t eacher a c t i v i t i e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y ,

by t each ing s t y l e . The t a b l e s a l s o ina lude t h e mean f r e -

quency f o r each i t e m on t t ie -schedule taken over a l l t h e ' I ,

l e s sons observed a s w e l l a s t h e t h e o r e t i c a l means f o r a

Piaget -der ived teaching p r a c t i c e obta ined a s o u t l i n e d i n t h e

previous chap te r .

ved P r a c t i c e -

By r e f e r r i n g to' Table 9 , t h e s t u d e n t < a c t i v i t y means of - - - - - - - - - - - -

t h e c u r r e n t teaching p r a c t i c e s can be compared wi th the - - += s t u d e n t a c t i v i t y means of f h 3 P i a g e t - d e r i v e d t each ing ,

p r a c t i c e .

4 -4 rro

4.J rd !-I

H k 4 ' H a r m

C C u 0 rd E E 8

- A - -

The mean f requency o f o c c u r r e n c e o f I t e m 1, which

measures t he \ amoun t o f t ime i n l e s s o n s d u r i n g which p e e r

i n t e r a c t i o n s and d i s c u s s i o n s of work a r e d e l i b e r a t e l y - o r g a n i z e d i s much less i n c u k e n t t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s t h a n

one would p l a n i f f o l l ~ w i n g P i a g e t ' s t h e o r y . .

S i m i l a r l y , t h e f r equency of occ&rences o f s t u d e n t s

p l a n n i n g t b e i r own l a b o r a t o r y p rocedure s ( I t e m 2 ) o c c u r s L

much less o f t e n t h a n i t would be p lanned f o r i n a P i a g e t -

d e r i v e d t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e . C

S t u d e n t s d i d n o t o f t e n d i s c u s s text-book q u e s t i o n s and

a p p l i c a t i o n o f s c i e n t i f i c p r i n c i p l e s b e f o r e do ing w r i t t e n

answers t o such q u e s t i o n s . N e i t h e r d i d t h e y o f t e n v e r b a l l y

a t t e m p t t o d i s c u s s t h e i r cond lus ions o r make hypotheses . \

Both o f t h e s e s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s ( I t e m s 3 and 4 ) would be

encouraged t o occu r more f r e q u e n t l y i f one were p l a n n i n g

. to promote development o f formal thought .

I n c u r r e n t t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s , t h e observed f requency

o f s t u d e n t s man ipu la t i ng t h e i r own a p p a r a t u s and c a r r y i n g

o u t t h e i r own expe r imen t s ( I t e m 5 ) i n l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t y

l e s s o n s (Type I ) comes ve ry c l o s e t o what would be planned

i h t h e P i a g e t - t y p e t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e .

Very l i t t l e t i m e is c u r r e n t l y devoted t o s t u d e n t s

r e p e a t i n g l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s t o a l l o w a s s i m i l a t i o n of - - -

new p r i n c i p l e s and t o e n a b l e new t h i n k i n g p a t t e r n s t o -- -- -- - - -- -- -- - - -- -

becoFe f- e s t a b l i s h e d ( I t e m 6 ) .

Whereas s t u d e n t s i n a l a r g e pe rcen t age of t h e c l a s s e s

observed were a l l o r g a n i z e d t o c a r r y o u t t h e same a c t i v i t i e s

A

a t t h e same t i m e ( I t e m 7 ) , t h i s would occu r less o f t e n i n a (- q P i a g e t - o r i e n t e d t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e . S t u d e n t s i n t h e l a t t e r

would more o f t e n be working through t o p i c s a t t h e i r own

rate and i n any one l e s s o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y a f t e r t h e t o p i c

i n t r o d u c t i o n , t h e s t u d e n t s would be invo lved i n d i f f e r e n t

a c t i v i t i e s . < The amount o f t i m e i n which s t u d e n t s would f o l l o w t e x t - A

book i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r l a b o r a t o r y i n v e s t i g a t i o n s ( I t e m 8 ) i s ~

s l i g h t l y - l e s s f o r t h e P i age t -de r ived t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e t h a n

f o r b t h e Type I l e s s o n s which invo lved s t u d e n t s i n l a b o r a t o r y . .

a c t i v i t i e s .

lXaboratory wr i t e -ups and i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t w r i t t e n -

work ( I t em 9) occu r red much more f r e q u e n t l y i n a l l t h e les-

sons than would be p lanned f o r i n t h e P i a g e t p r a c t i c e .

The o v e r a l l f requency o f &currence o f t h e a c t i v i t y

i n which s t u d e n t s answered probIems by a p p l y i n g a l g o r -

i thms ( I t e m 10) i s c l o s e & what would be expec ted i n t h e

P iage t -dekived s t y l e o f t each ing . The amount o f t i m e i n 0 d _.

which s t u d e n t s would u t i l i z e memorized d e f i n i t i o n s would

occu r less o f t e n i n t h e P i a g e t - t y p e s t r a t e g y ( I t e m 11) . Both of t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s , however, would occu r less o f t e n

t h a n was observed i n t h e Type I11 t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g y .

By r e f e r r i n g t o Table 1 0 , which l ists t h e means o f

t e a c h e r a c t i v i t i e s by t e a c h i n g t y p e , it can b e seen t h a t

f rrr a P i a g e t z k y p teachiw+-skra-t+y #w amnk e g &&me

occupied by t h e t e a c h e r q u e s t i o n i n g s t u d e n t s t o de t e rmine

Ta

ble

10

C

Mea

ns

oE

Te

ac

he

r A

cti

vit

y

Ite

ms

by

T

ea

ch

ing

T

yp

q

a

Ite

m M

eans

Te

ac

he

r d

al

k~

6

Dem

ons t

raft

io?

20

wo

rk

~ I

All type

5 2

- - - p-pp

t h e i r l e v e l of knowledge i n a s u b j e c t ( I t e m 1) is s l i g h t l y 1 h

h ighe r t han was observed i n t h i s sample of l e s s o n s . The . f requency o f occu r rence of thought-provoking q u e s t i o n s posed

by t h e t e a c h e r ( I t e m 2 ) and t h e amount of t i m e i n which a

t e a c h e r e x p e c t s v e r b a l e x p l a n a t i o n s o f l a b o f a t o r y observa-

t i o n s ( I t e m 3 ) , however, would be much h i g h e r i n a P i a g e t -

i d t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g y . - I n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t - t e a c h e r

i n t e r a c t i o n s (Item 4 ) would a l s o occu r m o r e . f r e q u e n t l y t h a n

observed i n t h i s s t u d y .

I t e m 5, which measured the frequency of occur rence of

t h e t e a c h e r t a l k i n g t o t h e whole c l a s s a t once would occu r

much less o f t e n i n t h e P i age t -de r ived p r a c t i c e . The means

of I tem 6 and 7 , which i n d i c a t e t h e f requency of occu r rence

of t e a c h e r demons t r a t i ons and t h e t e a c h e r t e l l i n g t h e c l a s s

i n advance t h e r e s u l t s of t h e i r i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , would r e m a i n -

a s i n f r e q u e n t a s i n t h e observed lessohs. Occasions du\;hrg'r\, L-,

which t h e t e a c h e r would engage i n a c t i v i t i e s o t h e r t han

t h o s e d i r e c t l y i n v o l v i n g s t u d e n t - t e a c h e r i n t e r a c t i o n s i

( I t e m 8 ) would occu r more f r e q u e n t l y i n a P i age t -de r ived

p r a c t i c e .

T o summarize t h e s e comparisons, t h e n , t h e f r e q u e n c i e s

of occu r rence of t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s observed i n t h i s s tudy

d i f f e r markedly from t h e f r e q u e n c i e s which would be expec ted

i f t h e P i a g e t i a n - d e r i v e d - p r a c t i c e s w e r e follawed, Observed

p r a c t i c e s - were s i m i l a r t o P i age t -de r ived - - p p e r a c t i c e s -- i n t h e -

l o w f requency of occu r rence of s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s 8 and 1 0 ,

- and t e a c h e r a c t i v i t i e s 6 and 7 , a l l of which ' a r e cbns ide fed

b u n l i k e l y t o a i d t h e development o f formal t hough t . Of ,

t h e a c t i v i t i e s cons ide red l i k e l y t o promote t h e develop-

ment of formal thought ; t h e o c c u r r e n c e . o f one o n l y was

s i m i l a r t o t h e P i age t -de r ived occu r rence . Th i s i t e m meas- *

ured t h e f requency o f . o c c u r r e n c e of t e a c h e r s ' q u e s t i o n s

d i r e c t e d a t f i n d i n g s t u d e n t s ' e x i s t i n g l e v e l s o f knowledge

i n a t o p i c (Teacher I t e m 1) .

CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

- r The f i r s t o b j e c t i v e of t h i s s tudy was t o o d e r i v e from

.

>

t h e l i t e r a t u r e t h o s e t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s which would a i d t h e

d e v e l o p m e n t ~ o f fo rma l -ope ra t iona l t h i n k i n g pa t te rns . ( f rom*.

c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s i n a d o l e s c e n t [ ~ i n i j u n i o r - it

secondary s c i e n c e c l a s s e s . Th i s was accomplished by a h --

comprehensive e x p l o r a t i o n o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t e d t o

b o t h p i a g e t 1 s t h e o r y and s c i e n c e t each ing . Next, t e a c h i n g

p r a c t i c e s which w e r e c o n ~ i d e r e d t o be most u s e f u l i n pro-

moting formal t hough t w e r e used t o deve lop an i n s t r u m e n t . -

- - b By app ly ing t h i s cod$nng s c h e d u l e t o l e s s o n s be ing t a u g h t f

i n j h n i o r secondary s c i e n c e c l a s s e s , i t was t h e n p o s s i b l e '. I

t o i d e n t i f y p r a c t i c e s c u r r e n t l y bei&\used by a sample o f

s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s and t o compare them w i t h t h e t h e o r e t i c a l

t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s dgduced krom t h e l i t e r a t u r e .

The x e s u l t s showed t h a t t h e m o s t f r e q u e n t l y q c c u r r i n g

s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s i nc luded s t u d e n t s writzing up l a b o r a t o r y

r e p o r t s o r w r i t i n g answers t o q u e s t i o n s or problems from - -- - -

t h e t e x t . b o o k and s t u d e n t s do ing l a b o r a t o r y work acco rd ing --- -, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

t o w r i t t e n d i r e c t i o n s . * A l l s t u d e n t s i n a c l a s s w e r e

r e q u i r e d t o do t h e same exper iment o r a c t i v i t y or answer

a t h e same set of problems from t h e i r t e x t book; they a l l

p rogressed through t h e i r work a t t he same r a t e .

B The most frequen.t t e a c h e r a c t i v i t y was t h e t e a c h e r #

t a l k i n g , d e s c r i b i n g o r e x p l a i n i n g c u r r e n t work t o t h e whole

cpass . Less o f t e n , t h e t e a c h e r would d i r e c t q u e s t i o n s t o -- 7 -

t h e whole- c l a s s t o .determine t h e i r l e v e l of knowledge of a

4 - - - -

t o p i c & t h e t e a c h e r would i n t e r a c t w i t h o r q u e s t i o n indi -A P

v i d u a l s t u d e n t s a s they c a r r i e d o u t their labora&oiy - -

Conclusions

The obkerveq p r a c t i c e s , t hen , w e r e n o t S i m i l a r t o tho& *

which one would a t t empt i f t h e developme'nt'of formal reason-

i n g was a g o a l of s c i e n c e t each ing . The P iage t -ae r ived + t

a c t i v i t i e s , aimed a t encoura4ing x. d i s e q u i l i b r i u m i n t h e

s t u d e n t ' s e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s , would i n c l u d e more f r e q u e n t I&

i n s t a n c e s of s t u d e n t s be ing d e l i b e r a t e l y encouraged t o d i s - e - .

c u s s t h e i T o b s e r v a t i o ~ s ; t o p l an t h e i r own p r o c e d u r e s , % 8 - \

a r e p e a t a t t i v i t i e s which they d i d n o t f u l l y understand ' a t . f i r s t , , and to b e a b l e t o p r o g r e s s through a t o p i c a t t h e i r

own r a t e . The t e a c h e r a t t empt ing ' . t o use t h e P i a - o r i e n t e d p r a c t i c e s would t a l k less t o t h e c l a s s

.. - -

-- - - - - - - - - - - - - p - -

b u t would a s k more q u e s t i o n s o f t h e s t u d e n t s , b&h o f t h e f --- - -- --

pppp

whole c l a s s and i n i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h s t u d e n t s .

t

The r e s u l t s of t h i s , s t u d y show t h a t most of t h e . teache;

and s t u d e n t a c t i v i t i e s observed i n junior secondary-sc ience .

classrooms w e r e based on a c t i v i t i e s and t o p i c s o u t l i n e d i n

t h e t e x t books. I n t h i s r e s p e c t , t h e s tudy a g r e e s wi th t h e I summary r e p o r t of t h e B r i t i s h Columbia Science Assessment * i

. ,I

when d i s c u s s i n g t h e teaching of sc ience i n jun io r secondary, - grades .

, _ S t u d e n t s i n many secondary c l a s s e s seldom o r never engage i n - a c t i v i t i e s s u c k as pre- -

par ing r e p o r t s , doing p r o j e c t s , des ign ing t h e i r own experiments , o r d i s c u s s i h g cur- r e n t m a t e r i a l s from newspaper and magazine a r t i c l e s ; (Summary Report, B.C. Sc ience '

Assessment, 1978, p . 4 5 )

That none of t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s were observed i s n o t t o i

say t h a t they do n o t occur. Teachers w e r e asked t o t each

normal, r o u t i n e l e s s o n s when peing observed; l e s s o n s which -

€

included t h e above a c t i v i t i e s may n o t have been considered \

normal o r r o u t i n e or may have bden considered more d i f f i c u l t

t o do when an-05server was i n t h e classroom. I n f a c t , i n

a t l e a s t one school t h e r e was evidence t h a t m a t e r i a l and

a r t i c l e s from newspapers and s c i e n c e magazines were used I ". - , *

a s t h e b a s i s of d i s c u s s i o n i n some sc ience l e s s o n s because

t h e r e were f i l e s and s h e l v e s i n t h e classrooms s tocked wi th

$2-

observed i n t h i s &udy, it is now p o s s i b l e t o r e t u r n t o t h e $r

/ _-- r i n i t i a l quest ions3and ponder t h e answefs -to them.

Discuss ion

' The l i t e r a t u r e surveyed showed t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f

s t u d e n t s i n s e n i o r h i g h s c h o o l , p robably two- th i rds of them,

are a t . t h e c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l s t a g e o f development.

Teaching p r a c t i c e s l i k e l y t o promote t h e development of

more complex r e a s o n i n g i n s t u d e n t s w e r e t h e n - i d e n t i f i e d .

I n view o f t h e f i r s t s t a t e m e n t , i t i s perhaps not s u r p r i s -

i n g t h a t p r e s e n t t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s a r e n o t s i m i l a r t o t h o s e

recomsdded i n t h e l i terature . If t h e Pi-agetran-derkved

p r a c t i c e s are based on c o r r e c t assumptions and t h e y would

i n f a c t a i d i n t h e development of formal t hough t , one would

. n ~ t e x p e c t t h e e x i s t i n g t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s , which d i f f e r

markedly from them, t o promote formal t hough t . - h * I

F u r t h e r r t h e development o f fo rma l -ope ra t iona l reason- a

i n g p a t t e r n s is probably n o t a goal p r e s e n t l y b e i n g pm-

sued by secondary s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s d e s p i t e t h e l a r g e amount

o f r e c e n t s c i e n c e t e a c h i n g r e s e a r c h which f o c u s e s on -b

P i a g e t t s t h e o r y of i n - t e ~ l e d t u a l development. The p r e s e n t

p o l i t i c a l c l i m a t e is more l i k e l y t o d i r e c t t e a c h e r s ' con- I'

c e r n s towards core c u r r i c u l a and t h e most e f f i c i e n t ways I

o f g e t t i n g f a c t s . a c r o s s t o s t u d e n t s . Teaching p r a c t i c e s

,which deve lop formal t hough t o r which u t i l i z e e n q u i r y

methods are o u t s i d e t h e ze i tge is tof we- ' % a c k t o + a s i e s "

F i n a l l y , t h e r e ' a r e some p e r s o n a l cgfnments on t h e 2

t o b ~ e r v e d ' t e a c h i n ~ p r a c t i c e s . I t was s u r p r i s i n g and pe r -

p l e x i n g t o f i n d t h a t a l l s t u d e n t s i n a l l c l a s s e s observed rn

w e r e r e q u i r e d to c a r r y o u t t h e same i n v e s t i g a t i o n s or

w r i t t e n work and p r o g r e s s a t t h e same r a t e . One can on ly

s p e c u l a t e on t h e r e a s o n s f o r t h i s . A t f i r s t i t was con-

s i d e r e d that it was pe rhaps because t h e t e x t book was

c l o s e l y adhered t o and t h e m a j o r i t y of s c h o o l s used t h e same

t e x t s . A c lose examina t ion o f t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h e t e x t s ,

however, r e v e a l e d t h a t , c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e s t a t e m e n t s i n 'I

t h e i r i n t r o d u c t i o n , e x t e n s i o n a c t i v i t i e s and a l t e r n a t i v e

r e f e r e n c e s t o o t h e r t e x t s were prov ided f o r many o f t h e

t o p i c s covered . The a u t h o r s of t h o s e t e x t s i n t e n d e d t h a t

" t h e c o u r s e ( c o u l d ) be t a i l o r e d t o t h e i n t e r e s t s and a b i l i -

t i e s of i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t s " (Schmid, 1970 and Schmid, 1973) .

One c a n unde r s t and t h a t t h e same a r e a o f s t u d y such a s ,

s a y , L i g h t o r Heat would be t h e focus o f s t u d y under taken

by t h e whole c l a s s s i n c e it i n v o l v e s u s i n g t h e same t y p e s

o f a p p a r a t u s . Bu t , s i n c e each t e a c h e r h a s h i s own s c i e n c e

c l a s s room and h a s ready a c c e s s t o a s to re room and a lab-

o r a t o r y a s s i s t a n t i n some s c h o o l s , i t would s e e m a t l e a s t

f e a s i b l e i n t e r m s of p h y s i c a l f a c i l i t i e s t h a t s t u d e n t s

c o u l d pu r sue d i f f e r e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n s w i t h i n t h e same c l a s s . - - - - - --

s t u d e n t s do have d i f f e r e n t a b i l i t i e s andpare a t d i f • ’ e c e n t -

~ l s i f e ~ t u a F 3 e v e l t o p m e n i . .I.nesedi f Ze-s carr -

be accommodated by a l l o w i n g d i f f e r e n t r a t e s o f p r o g r e s s

4 w i t h i n a t ic . re-lesson p r e p a r a t i o n and o r g a n i z a t i o n ,

however, a r e c e r t a i n l y more t i m e consuming i f d i f f e r e n t r a t e s

of p r o g r e s s a r e p lanned ,

One i a s t comment: t h e r e were very few o c c a s i o n s when

s t u d e n t s asked q u e s t i o n s o f t h e t e a c h e r . While i t might

be sugges t ed t h a t t h e p re sence of o b s e r v e r s i n h i b i t e d

s t u d e n t s ' normal a c t i v i t i e s , t h e i r o;her observed c lass room

behav iou r s showed t h a t t h i s w a s . n o t t h e problem. Although

t h e a sk ing o f q u e s t i o n s was n o t an a c t i v i t y f o r which t h e

frequency w a s judged an the cod ing s c h e d u l e , itYsence was most n o t i c e a b l e . The observed t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s ,

a p p a r e n t l y d o n o t encourage s t u d e n t - i n i t i a t e d q u e s t i o n s . ~

APPENDIX A

LETTERS OF APPROVAL TO DO RESEARCH I N THE SELECTED SCHOOL DISTRICTS

P R O F E S S I ~ N A L DEVELOPMENT CENTRE 9

B U R N A B Y SCHOOL B O A R D

Dr . Marvin F. Wideen, ' F a c u l t y o f Education, Sirqon Fras,er Un ive r s i t y ,

* BurnaGy, B . C.

Dear D r . Wideen:

March 9 , 1979

A s you a r e aware, t h e d i s t r i c t Research Committee reviewed i i your research proposa l on Teacher S t r a t e g i e s and Change S t r a t e g i e s O f Secondary Science Teachers a t a meeting on March 8, 1979. Although , , i

a t h e r e were some ques t i ons , your proposal was approved by the committee. 1

i

- The n e x t s t e p i n t h i s p r o j e c t w i l l involve t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of t h e a c t u a l schools t o become involved, and as I understand from your d e s c r i p t i o n of t he s tudy , t h i s is t o be done randomly. Once you have s e l e c t e d t he schools you would l i k e t o c o n t a c t , I would app rec i a t e you c a l l i n g me s o t h a t f can a t t end the m e t i n g s w i t h the secondary d e p a r t d n t s i n ' those schools .

The s t u d y is i n t e r e s t i n g and ambitious and w e w i l l t r y t o a s s i s t i n every way w e can. I w i l l look forward t o hear ing from you.

Yours t r u l y ,

Blake Ford Chairman Research C o d t tee

350 yoldom Avenue, Burnaby, B.C., V5B 3V1 Telephone 299- 8464 %$, . .P

SCHOOL No.

550 POlRlER STREET,

COQUlTLAM, B.C. VJJ LA7

Dr. H, Wideen, Facul ty of Eaucation, Simon F rase r Universi ty , Burnaby, B. C. VSA 1S6

Dear Dr. Wideen:

Thank you f o r your February 1st l e t t e r , and attachment, i n which you o u t l i n e a research proposal involving t h e teaching of-secondary science.

Approval is given f o r you t o contact the p r i n c i p a l s of secondary schools i n t he D i s t r i c t t o d i scuss your proposal, P a r t i c i p a t i o n , of course, i s l e f t t o the d i s c r e t i o n of ind iv idua l p r i n c i p a l s and teachers.

We look forward t o any r e s u l t s you are ab le t o share with us.

Yours very t r u l y , /

A, K. Mutter, Ass is tan t Superintendent of Schools.

fo r :

G. H, Paton, Superintendent of Schools.

A P P E N D I X B

O U T T J N E OF PURPOSES OF TIIE PROJECT

Secondary S c i e n c e Research P r o j k c t

P u r p o s e o f t h e S t u d y

The p u r p o s e of t h i s s t u d y is t o d e t e r m i n e h o w . s c i e n c e

i s c u r r e n t l y b e i n g t a u g h t and t o d e t e r m i n e w h a t f a c t o r s ,

s i t u a t i o n s and c o n s t r a i n t s i n f l u e n c e t h a t t e a c h i n g . From

t h i s , w e c a n t h e n i n v e s t i g a t e q u e s t i o n s s u c h a s : Do c u r -

r e n t s t r a t e g i e s r e f l e c t t h o s e recommended i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e ?

Do t e a c h e r s f i n d t h e m s e l v e s c o n s t r a i n e d t o u s e c e r t a i n

t e a c h i n g methods b e c a u s e o f e x t e r n a l p r e s s u r e s ? IJ

Those who have s t u d i e d i n n o v a t i o n i n e d u c a t i o n have

shown t h a t t h e p r o c e s s o f change i s enormously d i f f i c u l t t o

e f f e c t . T h e r e f o r e , a s e c o n d a r e a o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n v o l v e s

i d e n t i f y i n q t h e b a r r i e r s which t e a c h e r s e n c o u n t e r when t h e y

t r y t o change t h e i r method o f i n s t r u c t i o n ,

Thus t h e o v e r a l l i n t e n t i s t o d e t e r m i n e how s c i e n c e i s

b e i n g t a u g h t , w h a t , f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c e t e a c h e r s t o t e a c h a s

t h e y do , and what s t e p s a r e l i k e l y t o b e t h e m o s t p r o d u c t i v e

i n c h a n g i n g t h e method o f i n s t r u c t i o n . A s a means o f

i n i t i a t i n g a l i n e o f r e s e a r c h i n t o t h i s area, t h e f o l l o w i n g

s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s have been se t f o r t h e p r o j e c t :

a . TEF ider t t igp . eke b s a e k i - ~ g ~kr*t+~ies m& c o m e d y

u s e d by a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample o f t e a c h e r s ;

b. To de te rmine t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e s t r a t e g i e s

i d e n t i f i e d i n " a " a r e r e l a t e d t o v a r i o u s f a c t o r s i n c l u d i n g

teac&,r a t t i t u d e toward s c i e n c e a s i n q u i r y ;

c. To i ' den t i fy t h o s e s t r a t e g i e s o f change t o which

t e a c h e r s a r e l i k e l y t o respond;

d . To i d e n t i f y t h e b a r r i e r s t o improving t h e q u a l i t y

o f i n s t r u c t i o n a s p e r c e i v e d by t e a c h e r s .

Procedure

I n o r d e r t o a c h i e v e t h e s e o b j e c t i v e s , w e p ropose 4

t o o b t a i n d a t a from a random samplg o f 30 t eacHer s u s i n g

i n t e r v i e w s and a q u e s t i o n n a i r e , and c o l l e c t i n g t h r e e aud io

t a p e s o f e a c h t e a c h e r ' s c l a s s room t e a c h i n g . The a n a l y s i s

of t h e a u d i o t a p e s coupled w i t h t h e i n t e r v i e w d a t a w i l l en-

a b l e t h e r e s e a r c h e r s t o i d e n t i f y t h e t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s

most commonly used by t h e sample of t e a c h e r s .

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e and i n t e r v i e w w i l l b e x t r u c t u r e d t o '

g a t h e r d a t a on a r ange o f f a c t o r s t h a t w i l l be, r e l a t e d t o

t h e t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s and t h e t e a c h e r s ' a t t i t u d e s toward

t h e s e s t r a t e g i e s and toward s t r a t e g i e s o f change. A pa ra -

l l e l form of t h e t e a c h e r s ' q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l b e g i v e n t o

s t u d e n t s i n t h o s e c l a s s e s which w i l l be aud io t aped . Th i s - - -

a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i s expec t ed t o t a k e approximate ly twenty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -

minutes o f cJ.ass t i m e . The o u t - o f - c l a s s t i m e commitment f o r

each t e a c h e r w i l l b e abou t one hour .

The d a t a w i l l b e c o l l e c t e d by t h e r e s e a r c h team, which

i n c l u d e s f a c u l t y members i n E d u c a t i o n , and t h r e e g r a d u a t e

s t u d e n t s . A l l r e s e a r c h team members a r e e x p e r i e n c e d

e d u c a t o r s .

Follow-up

S i n c e t h e s t u d y i n v o l v e s t h e c o l l e c t i o n o f e m p i r i c a l

d a t a a b o u t t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s t h a t t h e p r t i c i p a n t s u s e ,

t h e r e s e a r c h e r b e l i e v e t h e t e a c h e r s w i l l b e i n t e r e s t e d i n f r e c e i v i n g a s u b a r y o f t h e f i n d i n g s a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e

s t u d y . T h e r e f o r e , w h i l e a l l d a t a w i l l r emain c o n f i d e n t i a l ,

t h e r e s e a r c h t e a m w i l l s h a r e t h e f i n a l r e p o r t w i t h t h e par-

' " i c i p a n t s .

Research Team

D r . Marv Wideen

D r . A 1 Whitney .

Margare t Cusack

Geok-Sim Seah

E l a i n e Baxr

I tern STUDmT A c t i v i t i e s / 1 2 4

S 1. work i n small groupa t h a t f a c i l i t a t e i n t a r a c t i o n s and discussions about work they a e doing

2. P lan t h e i r own procedures f o r c a r r y i n g o u t practical work, e . g. p l a n how t o determine t h e d e n s i t y of a s o l i d , l i q u i d o r g a s

3. D i s c u s a p g l i c r t i o n a of newly l e a r n e d concepts o r i d e a s w i t h th*ir p e e r s , e.q. b e f o r e s t a r t l n g t o s n s v a r textbook q w a t i o n s would f i r s t mrbaMly dl<- c u s s t h e i r explana t ions w i t h each o t h e r

4 . Are encouraged t o make con- , elusions o r g r o p s e hyeoth-

e s a s baaed on observa t ions made d u r i n g lab a c t i v i t i e s , e.q. s t u d e n t s u a encouraged t o make a g a n a r a l i z a t i o n t h a t only tt\e msta l *ampha conduct e l e c t r i c i t y

8 , Follov text-book i n a t r u c t i o n s ( o r procodura w r i t t o n on b.b . o r 0.h.p. o r handput # b e t ) for. l a b o r a t o r y i c t i v i t i e a

9 . Do l a b wri te-up o r w r i t t e n m m r s t o quaa t ions from textbook ( o r b.c. o r handout s h e e t ) on a i r awn, e.9. s i t and w r i t . o u t a n m r a t o questions about r e c e n t l y 1arrn.d concepta wi thout any p e r diacuaaiona

I

10. Answr p r o b l e m by applyinq an algori thm, e.g. answer p r o b l e m on denai ty by apply- i n g rT-= !? or do h r r t protrf- by applying qenera l - i z e d formula

TI. E K axpec t n d to iBiiiWlr3 m a t e r i a l , e.g. d e f i n i t i o n s , valenor and apply them when n0ad.d without n a c a s a a r i l y undaryandinq the concept f i r a t -

T 1. A i k s quest ions t o determine pupi l ' l a m 1 of understanding of &c - whole c l a s s , indi- vidual ly o r i n groups, 0-g. may alk quest ion t o gauge studonts ' understanding of energy, t._lapQzptur$, e f f e c t of hea t

2'. Asks quast ions ortfich a r e not idmediately msuarab la - quas- t i ons a r e designed t o amuse cu r io s i t y o r show studonts m a t thara ara some par- of *Mpk.-ttrtctfadvMeft -

cannot y a t ba understood with t h e i r ex i s t i ng know lodge

d

3. Encouraga s tudenta t o explain o r account f o r obssrvationa made during l a b a c t i v i t y , e . g . why d id only 2 so lu t ions change colour; why d id this l i g h t go o f f f i r s t , what doen t h a t p r e c i p i t a t e suggest t o you?

4. Divides c l a s s i n t o small groups and encouragmm pear i n t e r ac t i ons about t h e i r f r tvestfgat iont o r other week. I n t e r ac t s himself with smal l groups t o gauge s tudents ' undarstanding o f prosant work o r r e d i r e c t t h e i r thinking I I I I

-

5. C l a im athent ion o r , o r lac- I I I I I tu ras t o whola c l a s s a t onca. Leason conmists mainly of teacher t a l k -

6. DIlsonstrater s c i e n t i f i c prin- c i p l e s by manipulating appsr-

- a tu s himeelf. Students can only o b s a m

7. Ta l l s c lans i n advance th.e concept o r m l a that thay a r e going t o prove, e.9. today ws arm going t o obmrvm thrrt - t a la conduct b a t im t t a r tffarr-rtQs+?z&ak-- - --

8. Rmtreats from c l a s s r o m o r ---

in to rac t ions axcapt to main- t a i n d i s c ip l i ne . No i n t e r - act ion with* s tudants to gauga t h e i r progress o r understutd- ing of a t op i c

APPENDIX D

SCHEDULE ON- WHICH TEACHERS AND EDUCATORS INDICATED IDEAL AMOUNT OF TIME WHICH CQULD BE

SPENT ON PIAGET-DERIVED ACTIVITIES IN SCIENCE LESSONS

Please ind ica te on the s c a l e below the amount of time t h a t could be 3

spent on each of t h e a c t i v i t i e s l i s t e d assuming t h a t the ac t iv i ty ' would help develop formal thought and you intended using the

%,

a c t i v i t i e s t o promote development of formal thought. Since the . I

con ten t of sc ience lessons can vary between l a b a c t i v i t i e s and discuss ions , it might be b e t t e r t o think .of t h e percentage of time which could be occupied by each a c t i v i t y over a period of 3 lessons r a t h e r than a s i n g l e lesson.

Percent of t i rne . i t could occupy I

STUDENT ACTIVITY 0% 200 40% 60% 800 100% I I

i l .

2 .

Students work i n groups so t h a t they can discuss t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s , r e s u l t s , ideas .

Students p l a n t h e i r own procedures f o r carrying o u t p r a c t i c a l work.

3 .

t

A

Students d i scuss t h e i r obsenrat ions , o r app l ica t ions of a new concept, with t h e i r peers before attempting t o answer t e x t book

4. Students make condus ions o r propose 7 7

i hypotheses about observat ions made dur ing lab a c t i v i t i e s . f 3

5 . I

Students manipulate apparatus them- se lves . They s e t up t h e i r ma te r ia l s , do t h e i r own l ab work, uae micro- scopes, e t c .

6.

TEACKER ACTIVITY I 1

Students r epea t o r extend t h e i r observat ions a f t e r d iscuss ing their conclusions with t h e i r peers o r the teacher . May be r e p e t i t i o n of an a c t i v i t y t o inc rease f a m i l i a r i t y w i ' t h concept.

1

7 . Individual s tudents o r groups progress a t own r a t e through a topic . Different groupe would be a t d i f f e r e n t s t ages i n moat lessons.

Teacher asks quest ions which are thought provoking and designed t o arouae c u r i o s i t y of s tuden t s o r designed t o make u8enU aware theme a r e still &ngs they cannot exp la in with t h e i r present know- ledge of a topic .

C 1 .

3.1 Teacher encouraaea students, to I I

Teacher asks question2,to determine the pup i l ' a l e v e l of understanding of a hop ic - whole c l a s s , individu- a l l y or i n groups.

I t i o n s made during a l a b a c t i v i t y . --

4. Teacher i n t e r a c t . wkth individuals o r small groups t o ask quest ions , check s tudents progress, become aware. of t h e reasoning p a t t e r n s they a r e using.

Please i n d i c a t e on t h e t a b l e below t h e proport ion of time which you ' c o n s i d e r need be spent on each a c t i v i t y i f (1) you considered each b i t y were no t l i k e l y t o promote the development of formal thought and (2)ou aimed t o develop formal reasoning i n sc ience c l a s s e s . Since t he conten t of sc ience lesson can vary it might be b e t t e r t o th ink of t h e of t i m e which could be occupied by each a c t i v i t y over a lessons r a t h e r than a s i n g l e lesson.

9. Stqdents do w r i t t e n answers t o ques t ions from text-book on t h e i r own without any d iscuss ion wi th peers ar t e ache r s o r do lab w r i t e - ups on t h e i r own.

STUDENT ACTIVITY 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 10

.6. Studedts use algori thms by which they answer problems e.g. a r e taught how t o manipulate a formula D = t o f i n d t h e unknown

;8. Students fol low te+-book in s t ruc - ,

t i o n s f o r l a b a c t i v i t i e s ( o r a procedure w r i t t e n o u t by t eache r on b.b. o r 0.h.p.)

I

v

.l. Students use memorized ma te r i a l 0.9. d e f i n i t i o n s , valence and apply them without neces sa r i l y understanding them.

TEACHER ACTIVITY 9U \

6. Teacher demonstrates s c i e n k i f i c ' 1

a I ,

'5. Teacher t a l k s , l e c t u r e $ , c la ims a t t e n t i o n of whole c l a s s a t once. Lesson c o n s i s t s mainly of t e ache r t a l k .

1

p r i n c i p l e s by manipulating apparatus himself (demonstrating a new tech- - *

, I

nique no t included) . 1 7. Teacher te l ls c l a s s i n advance t h e I

8. Teacher withdraws from i n t e r a c t i o n s wi th c l a s s and simply superv ises s tuden t s w i t h no ve rba l i n t e r a c t i o n s except t o maintain d i s c i p l i n e . I---- concept o r r u l e that they are going t o "prove" e.g. Today w e a r e going t o observe that . . . "

I I

APPENDIX E

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION GRAPHS OF OBSERVED TEACHING PRACTICES

.

Teacher 1 1 tern

S 1 1 3 4

5 6 7 8 9

10 11

T 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Item

s 1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8 9

10 11

T 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 8

I I zero

Teacher 3 Item Teacher 2

Frequency d i s tr ibut ion graphs of observed teaching pract ices

Item Teacher 4 Item Teacher 5

Item Teacher 6 Item Teacher 7

Teacher' 8 Item Item Teacher 9

2 3

4 .......... .......... 5 .......... 6 7

Teacher 1 0 I t e m Item Teacher 11

Teacher 1 2 I tern

s 1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9

10 11

T 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

I tern

S 1 2 3

4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11

T 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8

Teacher 13

Teacher 15

I tern

S 1 2 3

4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11

T 1 2 3 >4 5 6 7 8

I tern

S 1 2 3

4 5 ,6 7 8 9

10

11 T 1

2 3 4 5 6

7 8

Teacher

I t e m Teacher 1 6 I t e m Teacher 17

I t e m Teacher 1 8

BIBLIOGRAPHY 2 \ . J

Arons , A.B . c u l t i v a t i n g t h e c a p a c i t y f o r f o r m a l r e a s o n i n g : o b j e c t i v e s and p r o c e d u r e s i n an i n t r o d u c t o r y p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e c o u r s e . American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , 1976 , 44, 834-838. -

Arons , A.B., & K a r p l u s , R . I m p l i c a t i o n s o f a c c u m u l a t i n g d a t a o n l e v e l s o f i n t e l l e c t u a l d e v e l o p m e n t . American J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c s , 1976 , - 44, 396. '

Bady, R . J . M e t h o d o l o g i c a l i s s u e s i n f o r m a l o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h : What d o e s i t mean to b e f o r m a l ? S c i e n c e E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 7 8 , - 6 2 , 233-239.

r

B a s s , J . E . , & Montague, E . J . P i a g e t - b a s e d s e q u e n c e s of i n s - truction i n science. S c i e n ~ x ? Education, 1972 , - 5 6 , 503-512.

B e l a n g e r , M. L e a r n i n g s t u d i e s i n s c i e n c e e d u c a t i o n . Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , 1 9 6 9 , - 39 , 377-395.

B e l l a c k , A . A . (Ed . ) Theory and r e s e a r c h i n t e a c h i n g . N e w York: T e a c h e r s C o l l e g e P r e s s , 1963.

B l a k e , A . J . D . , & N o r d l a n d , F . H . S c i e n c e i n s t r u c t i o n and c o g n i t i v e g r o w t h i n c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s . J o u r n a l o f R e s e a r c h i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1978 , - 1 5 , 413-419.

B l a s i , A . , % H o e f f e l , E.C. A d o l e s c e n c e and f o r m a l o p e r a - t i o n s . Human Development, 1974 , - 1 7 , 344-363.

B o r i c h , G . D . The a p p r a i s a l o f t e a c h i n g : c o n c e p t s and p ro - c e s s . Read ing , Mass. : ~ d d i s o n - ~ e s l e y P u b l i s h i n g Coy., 1977.

B r a i n e r d , C . J . P i a g e t ' s t h e o r y o f i n t e l l i g e n c e . Englewood C l i f f s , N . J. : P r e n t i c e - H a l l Inc . . , 1978 .

Bredderman, T.A. The e f f e c t s o f t r a i n i n g o n t h e deve lopment o f t h e a b i l i t y t o c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e s . J o u r n a l o f R e s e a r c h i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1 9 7 3 , - 1 0 , 189-200.

B r i t i s h Columbia: W i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n . ~ r i t i s h Columbia s e i e n e e a s s e s s m e n t , summary report, V i c k s r i a : Q u a ' s -

p r i n t e r , 1978. -- - - -- --

C a n t u , L.L. , & H e r r o n , J . D . C o n c r e t e and f o r m a l s t a q e s and s c i e n c e c o n c e p t a t t a i n m e n t . J o u r n a l o f ~ e s e a r c h i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1978 , 15, 135-143.

C a s e , R . , & F r y , C. E v a l u a t i o n o f an a t t e m p t t o t e a c h s c i e n t i f i c i n q u i r y and c r i t i c i s m i n a w o r k i n g c l a s s h i g h s c h o o l . J o u r n a l o f R e s e a r c h i n S c g e n c e T e a c h i n q , 1973 , 1 0 , 135-142. -

C h i a p p e t t a , E . L . A r e v i e w o f P i a g e t i a n s t u d i e s r e l e v a n t t o s c i e n c e i n s t r u c t i o n a t t h e s e c o n d a r y and collese l e v e l . S c i e n c e E d u c a t i o n , 1976 , 6 0 , 253-261. -

D e Carcer, I . A . , G a b e l , D.L., & S t a v e r , J . R . I m p l i c a t i o n s o f P i a g e t i a n r e s e a r c h f o r h i g h s c h o o l s c i e n c e t e a c h - i n g : a r e v i e w of t h e l i t e r a t u r e . Science E d u c a t i ~ n , - 1978. 6 2 . 571-583.

D e V r i e s , R. R e l a t i o n s h i p s among P i a g e t i a n , IQ, and a c h i e v e - ment a s s e s s m e n t s . C h i l d Development , 1974 , 45, 746-756. -

" D r i v e r , H. When i s a s t a g e n o t a s t a g e ? A c r i t i q u e o f P i a g e t ' s t h e o r y o f c o g n i t i v e deve lopment and i t s a p p l i c a t i o n t o s c i e n c e e d u c a t i o n . Review o f E d u c a t i o n - - a 1 R e s e a r c h , 1978. 21. 54-61.

Duckworth, E. P i a g e t r e d i s c o v e r e d . I n P i a g e t r e d i s c o v e r e d , R . E . R i p p l e & V.N. R o c k c a s t l e ( E d s . ) . I t h a c a , N e w York: C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1964.

Duckworth,. E : E i t h e r w e ' r e t o o e a r l y a n d t h e y c a n ' t l e a r n it or w e ' r e t o o l a t e a n d t h e y know i t a l r e a d y : t h e dilemma of "Apply ing ~ i a g e t " ; Harva rd ~ d u c a t i o n a l Review, 1979 , 4 4 , 297-312 . -

D u l i t , E. A d o l e s c e n t t h i n k i n g l a P i a g e t : t h e f o r m a l s t a g e . J o u r n a l o f Youth and A d o l e s c e n c e , 1 9 7 2 , 1,

A

281-301.

E a s l e y , J . A . Comments o n t h e INRC g r o u p . I n !?iaget r e d i s - c o v e r e d , R . E . R i p p l e & V.N. R o c k c a s t l e ( E d s . ) . I t h a c a , PJew York: C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1964 .

E g g l e s t o n , J . F . , G a l t o n , M.J., J o n e s , M.E. A s c i e n c e t e a c h - i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s c h e d u l e . London: Macmil lan E d u c a t i o n , 1975 .

E h i n d e r o , O . J . Formal o p e r a t i o n a l p r e c o c i t y a n d a c h i e v e m e n t i n b i o l o g y among some N i g e r i a n h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s . S c i e n c e E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 7 9 , 6 3 , 231-236. -

Fisshler , A. S , , & Z F m e r , 6, The & v e k p ~ n k 4 an observa- t i o n a l i n s t r u m e n t f o r s c i e n c e t e a c h i n g . J o u r n a l o f R e s e a r c h i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n q , 1967-1968, 5 , 127-137. -

F l a v e l l , J . H . The d e v e l o p m e n t a l p s y c h o l o g y o f J e a n P i a g e t . New York: D. v a n N o s t r a n d P u b l i s h i n g Co. I n c . , 1963 .

F l a v e l l , J.H. C o g n i t i v e Development . Englewood C l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e H a l l I n c . , 1 9 7 7 .

F r i o t , F .E . C u r r i c u l u m e x p e r i e n c e s a n d movement f rom c o n c r e t e - o p e r a t i o n a l t h o u g h t . I n J . W . R e n n e r , D.G. S t a f f o r d , A . E . Lawson, J.W. McKinnan, F.E. F r i o t , & D . H . K e l l o g g . R e s e a r c h , t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g w i t h t h e P i a g e t mode l . Norman: U n i v e r s i t y o f Oklahoma P r e s s , 1976 .

G a l l a g h e r , J.J. A t o p i c c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s y s t e m f o r c l a s s r o o m o b s e r v a t i o n . AERA Monograph No. 6 . C h i c a g o : Rand McNal ly , 1970 .

G a l t o n , M - , & E q q k s t o n , J. Same characteristics s f effec- t i v e s c i e n c e t e a c h i n g . European J o u r n a l o f S c i e n c e E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 7 9 , 1, - )75-86.

G i n s b u r q , H . , & Opper , S. P i a g e t ' s t h e o r y o f i n t e l l e c t u a l d e v e l o p m e n t ( 2 n d e d . ) . Englewood c l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l . I n c . , 1 9 7 9 .

Good, T . L . , Biddle, B . J . , & Brophy , J . E . T e a c h e r s make a d i f f e r e n c e . New York: H o l t . ~ i n e h a r t & W i n s t o n . 1975.

Good, T .L . & Brophy, J . E . Look ing i n c l a s s r o o m s ( 2 n d e d . ) New York: Harper & Raw, ~ u b l i s h e r s , 1978 .

*I

Good, R . , Kromhout, R . A . , & M e l l o n , E . K . P i a g e t ' s work a n d c h e m i c a l e d u c a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f . C h e m i c a 1 E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 7 9 , st 426-430.

Good, R . , M e l l o n , E . K . , & Kromhout , R . A . The work of J e a n P i a g e t . J o u r n a l - of C h e m i c a l ~ d u c a f i o n , 1 9 7 8 , 55, 688-693.

l \

G o o d s t e i n , M . , & H o w e , A.C. The hse o f c o n c r e t e m e t h o d s i n s e c o n d a r y c h e m i s t r y i n s t c t i o n . J o u r n a l o f Research i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1 9 7 8 . - g, 361-366.

Greenway, M . W . , & O l l i v e r , S . A . The d e v e l o p m e n t and a p ~ l i - c a t i o n o f a c o d i n q s c h e d u l e based o n Schwab's l e v e l s of o p e n - n e s s . Maske r s Thes is , Siman Frase r U n i v e s s i t y , 1976 .

H a l e , J.P. Pz'i i n ~ e s t i g ~ i o n OF two f5rmaT-operaEEEZ s s c h e m a t a i n a d o l e s c e n t s e n r o l l e d i n ISCS c l g s s r o o m s . J o u r n a l o f R e s e a r c h i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1976,. 1 3 , 559-564.

- *

-.

H a l l , J.R. C o n s e r v a t i o n c o n c e p t s i n e l e m e n t a r y c h e m i s t r y . J o u r n a l o f R e s e a r c h i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1 9 7 3 , - 1 0 , 143-146.

4

Han , J o n g H a . An a n a l y s i s of t h e s e c o n d y e a r Korean s c i e n c & t e x t book :sing P i a g e t i a n c o n c r e t e a n d f o r m a l o p e r a - t i o n a l t h i n k i n s p a t t e r n s . ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , The F l o r i d a state U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 7 7 ) D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1978 , - 38, 5 ' 3 7 6 ~ . ( U n i v e r M i c r o f i l m s No. 7 8 0 1 4 8 1 ) .

H a r t f o r d , F . , & Good, R . A s s e s s m e n t o f c o q n i t i v e ' r e q u i r e - men t s of i n s t r u c t i o n a 1 m a t e r i a l s . S c h o o l L S c i e n c e - a n d M a t h e m a t i c s , 1 9 7 6 , - 1 2 6 , 231-237.

H e r b e r t , J . , & A t t r i d g e , C . A g u i d e f o r d e v e l o p e r s a n d u s e r s . : o f o b s e r v a t i o n s y s t e m s and m a n u a l s . Amer ican ~ d & t i o n a l Research Journal, 1 9 7 5 , 12, 1-20.

Heyson, J . D . P i a g c t f o r c h e m i s t s . J o u r n a l o f Chemica l E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 7 5 , - 5 2 , 146-150.

H e r r o n , J . D . F i d g e t i n t h e c l a s s r o o m , J o u r n a l of -.-- C h e m i c a l E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 7 8 , - 5 5 , 165-170, ( a ) .

H c r r o n , J . D. R o l e of l e h r n i n c j a n d d e v e l o p h e n t : c r i , t i q u e of Novak ' s compar i sonb oE Ausube l a n d P i a g e t . S v i e n c e E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 7 8 , 6 2 , 593-605. (b) -- - 7

Hobbs, E .D . Fo rma l o p e r a t i o n s i n s e c o n d a r y s t u d e n t s . (Masters T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f A l b e r t a , 1 9 7 5 ) C a n a d i a n a , 1 9 7 7 , - 3 , 1086. ( N a t i o n a l L i b r a r y o f Canada No. 2 6 7 8 1 ) .

I n q l e , R . R . , & S h a y c r , M . C o n c e p t u a l demands i n N u f f i e l d 0 - l e v e l c h e m i s t r y . E d u c a t i o n i n C h e m i s t r y , 1 9 7 1 , - 8 , 182-183.

I n h e l d e r , B . , & P i a g e t , J . The g r o w t h o f l o g i c a l t h i n k i n g from c h i l d h o o d to a d o l e s c e n c e . New ~ o r k : B a s i c Books , 1958 .

8-

I n h e l d e r , B . , S i n c l a i r , H . , & . B o v e t , M: m n s and the. . . elompnt nf co- Cambr idge , Mass: H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1974 .

Hudson, M . J . I n t r o d u c i n g t h e m o l e . E d u c a t i o n i n C h e m i s t r y , 1 9 7 6 , - 1 3 , 110-111.

K a r p l u s , R. S c i e n c e t e a c h i n g a n d t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f r e a s o n - i n g . J o u r n a l o f R e s e a r c h i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1 9 7 7 , 1 4 , 169-175. -

K a r p l u s , R . , & K a r p l u s , E .F . I n t e l l e c t u a deve lopment beyond e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l I11 - r a t i d a l o n g i t u d i n a l s t u d y . S c h o o l ~ G i e n c e and ~ a t h e m a d c s , 1972, 72 , - - 735-742.

K a r p l u s , R . , K a r p l u s , E . , Formisano, E . ; & P a u l s e n , A.C. A s u r v e y o f p r o p o r t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g and c o n t r o l o f - -

v a r i a b l e s i n s e v e n c o u n t r i e s . J o u r n a l of R e s e a r c h i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1977, - 1 4 , 411-417. ( a )

, Karplus' , R . , Lawsoni A . E . , Wollman, A . E . , Appe l , M. B e r n o f f , R . , Howe, A . , Rusch, J.J., & S u l P i v a n , F. S c i e n c e teaching and the deve lopment o f r e a s o n i n q . B e r k e l e y : Lawrence H a l l o f S c i e n c e , B e r k e l e y , 1977. (b).

Ka*lus, R . , & P e t e r s o n , R.W. I n t e l l e c t u a l deve lopment beyond e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l 11: R a t i o , a s u r v e y . SchoB1 S c i e n c e and Mathemat ics , 1970 , - 70, 813-820.

Kass , H . , & Wheele r , A . E . Problem a r e a s i n l e a r n i n g chem- i s t ~ x i n h i g h s e h o o l , P a p e r p r e s e n t e d a t t h e a n n u a l m e e t i n g o f t h e N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e T e a c h e r s A s s o c i a t i o n , A t l a n t a , G e o r g i a , March 1979.

va, * K e a t i n g , D.P. P r e c o c i o u s c o g n i t i v e deve lopment a t t h e l e v e l

o f f o r m a l o p e r a t i o n s . C h i l d Development, 1975 , - 46, 276-280.

Kohlberg , L. & ~ i l l i g a n , C . The a d o l e s c e n t as a p h i l o s o p h e r : t-he d i s c o v e r y o f s e l f i n a p o s t - c o n v e n t i o n a l wor ld . Daeda lus , 1971, E, 1051-1086.

Kolod iy , G . 0 . c o g n i t i v e development and s c i e n c e . t e a c h i n g . J o u r n a l o f Research i n S c i e n c e T e a c h i n g , 1977 , - 1 4 , 21-26.

K u b l i , F. P i a g e t ' s c o g n i t i v e psycho logy and its consequences f o r t h e t e a c h i n g o f s c i e n c e . European J o u r n a l o f S c i e n c e E d u c a t i o n , 1979 , - 1, 5-20.

rB

Kuhn, D. R e l a t i o n o f two P i a g e t i a n s t a g e t r a n s i t i o n s ' t o IQ: C h i l d Development, 1974, - . 45, 157-162.

Kuhn, D. The a p p J i c a t i o n o f P i a g e t ' s t h e o r y o f c o g n i t i v e development t o educat ion. . Harvard E d u c a t i o n a l Review, 1979, - 49, 340-360.

-

Kuhn, D . , & ~ n g e l e v , J. An e x p e r i m e n t a l s t u d y o f t h e d e v e l o p - - - mgnL sfL•’QEn%L-*ra t i o n & #%€uJk,- - W & = v g b ~ ~ & - -

1976, - 47, 697-706.

Lawson, A.E. Combining v a r i a b l e s , c o n t r o l l i n g v a r i a b l e s , and p ropor t ions : - i s t h e r e a psychologica l l i n k ? >Science Educat ion, 1979, - 63, 67-72. '

Lawson, A . E . , Karplus, R . , & Adi, H. The a c q u i s i t i o n of p r o p o s i t i o n a l l d g i c and formal o p e r a t i o n a l schemata dur ing t h e secondary school yea r s . J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1978, - 15 , 465-477,

Lawson, A.E. , Nordland, F.H.', & Devito, A. ~ i a ~ e t i a n ' f o r m a l o p e r a t i o n a l t a s k s : a c rossover s tudy of l e a r n i n g e f f e c t and r e l i a b i l i t y . Science Education, 1974, 58, 267-276. -

Lawson, A.E. , & Renner, J . W . A q u a n t i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s ~f responses t o P i a g e t i a n t a s k s and i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r currigulum. Science Education, 1974, 58, 545-559. -

-

Lawson, A.E . , & Wollman, W.T. Encouraging t h e t r a n s i t i o n from concre te t o formal c o s n i t i v e func t ion inq - an exper-iment. Journa l of ~ e a e a r c h i n Science Teaching, 1976, 13 , 413-430. Ir

- Lawson, A . E . , & Wollman, W.T. Using chemistry problems t o

provoke s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n . Journa l of Chemical Educat ion, 1977, 54, 41-43. -

Levine, D . I . , inn, M.C. S c i e n t i f i c reasoning a b i l i w i n adolescence: t h e o r e t i c a l viewpoints and educa t iona l i m p l i c a t i o n s . J o u r n a l of ~ e s e a r c h i n Science Teaching, 1977, - 1 4 , 371-384.

Linn, M.C., Chen, B . , & T h i e r , H.D. Teaching c h i l d r e n t o c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e s : i n v e s t i g a t i o n of a f ree-choice environment. J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1977, 1 4 , 249-255. - *

Lovell , ' K . I n t e l l e c t u a l growth and t h e school curr iculum. I n F .B. Murray (Ed. ) , The Tmpact of P i a g e t i a n theory on educa t ion , phi losophy, p s y c h i a t r y and psychology. Balt imore; u n i v e r s i t y Park P r e s s , 1979.

Lowell, W . E . A *study of h i e r a r c h i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n concre te and a b s t r a c t thought . Journa l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1979, - 16, 255-262.

-

McKinnon, J . W . , & Renner, J . W . Are c o l l e g e s concerned wi th i n t e l l e c t u a l development. ArnericanvJournal of Physics , 1971, 39,-1047-1052.-

-- - -

Medley, D.M., & M i t z e l , H.E. The s c i e n t i f i c s tudy of t eacher behavior . I n A.A. Bel lack (Ed.) Theory and r e s e a r c h i n teachinp. N e w York: Teachers College P r e s s , 1963.

Miller, W.B. Impl ica t ions of P i a g e t ' s theory of in te l l e ' c - t u a l development (Master 's t h e s i s , Univers i ty of New Brunswick, 1974) Canadiana, 1976, - 2 , 842. (Na t iona l

- Libra ry of." Canada No. 22942) . a

Munby, H. P i a g e t i a n r e s e a r c h i n sc ience educat ioq . Some misgivings about i t s p o t e n t i a l t o improve p s c t i c e . Paper p resen ted a t t h e 1978 n a t i o n a l meetinq of t h e ~ a t i o n a l Assoc ia t ion f o r Research i n s c i e n c e Teaching, Toronto, A p r i l 1978.

Neimark, E. D. I n t e l l e c t u a l d e v e l o p d n t dur inq adolescence. I n F. Horowitz (Ed. ) , Review of c h i l d development r e sea rch (Vol. 4 ) Chicago: Univers i ty of Chicago P r e s s , 1975,

Nous, A . , & Raven, R. The e f f e c t s of a s truct 'ured l e a r n i n g sequence on c h i l d r e n ' s c o r r e l a t i v e th ink ing about b i o l o g i c a l phenomena. Journa l of -Research i n Science Teaching, 1973, - 10; 251-255.

P i a g e t , J. Cogni t ive development i n c h i l d r e n : development and l e a r n i n g . ' J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 196.4, - 2 , 176-186.

P i a g e t , J. I n Ha l l , E . , A conversa t ion wi th Jean P i a g e t and Barbel Inhe lde r . Psychology Today, 1970, 3(12),25-32. -

\

P i a g e t , J. ~ n t e l l e c t u a l e v o l u t i o n from addlescence t o adulthood. Human Development, 1972, 15 , 1-12. -

P i a g e t , J. Foreward t o P i a c p t i n t h e classroom. M. Schwebel & J. ~ a p h (Eds . ) . New York: Basic' Books, 1973.

Rasmussen, W.H., & Schmid, M . C . Developing s c i e n c e concepts i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y . Scarborough, Ont.: P ren t i ce -Ha l l , 1968.

Raven, R . J . , & Murray, R.B. E f f e c t of h igh school chemistry exper iences on P i a g e t ' s operat'ive comprehension. Science Educat ion, 1978, - 62, 467-470.

I

~ e n n e r , J ,W. P-iaget ' s theory-+f a s s i m i h t i o r t and-concept- -

l ea rn ing . E.D.R.S. No. E.D. 156 461, 1978. -- ---

Renner, J . W . , Grant , R.M., & ~ u t h e r l a n d , J. Content and . concre te thought . s c i e n c e ducati ion, 1978, 62, - 215-221.

Renner, J . W . , & Lawson, A.E. P i a q e t i a n theory and i n s t r u c - t i o n i n phys ics . The physics Teacher, 1973, 11, 165- - 169. ( a ) .

Renner, J . W . , & Lawson, A.E. Promoting i n t e l l e c t u a l develop- ment through s c i e n c e teaching. The Physics Teacher, 1973, 11, 273-276. (b ) . -

Renner, J . W . , S t a f f o r d , D.G., Lawson, A . E . , McKinnon, J . W . , Fr iot . , F.E., & Kellogg, D.H. Research, t each ing and l e a r n i n g w i t h t h e P i a g e t model.' Norman: Univers i ty of Oklahoma P r e s s , 1976.

Sayre, S . , & B a l l , D.W. P i a g e t i a n cognitive development and achievement i n sc ience . ~ o u r n a l of ~ e s e a r c h i n

- Science Teaching, 1975, 12, 165-174. - S'chmid, M; ( E d . ) , Extending sc ience concepts i n t h e labpra-

to ry . Scarborough, Ont.: Prent ice-Hal l , 1970.

Schmid, M. I n t roduc ing sc ience concepts i n t h e l abora to ry . Scarborough, Ont.: Prent ice-Hal l , 1973.

Schwebel, M., & Raph, J. P i a g e t i n t h e classsoom. mw 8

York: Bas ic Books, 1973.,

Shayer, M. How t o a s s e s s p i e n c e courses . Education i n Chemistry, 1970, - 7, ,182-186.

\

-

Shayer, M . , Kuchemann, D . E . , & Wylam, H. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of P i a g e t i a n s t a g e s of th ink ing i n B r i t i s h middle schoa l and secondary school ch i ld ren . B r i t i s h Journa l

L of Educat ional Psychology, 1976, 46, 164-173. - SheAhan, D. J. The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of concre te and formal

i n s t r u c t i o n a l procedures. (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n ,

t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1970, 31, 2748A.

t S t a t e Univers i ty of N e w York, Albany, 1970) . Disse r t a - . ( u n i v e r s i t y Microfilms No. 70-25479).

S i e g l e r , R.S., & L i e b e r t , R.M. Acquis i t ion of formal s c i e n t i f i c reasoning by 10- and 13-year-olds: des igning a f a c t o r i a l experiment. Development Psychology, 1975, 11, 401-402. -

- - - - - --

S i g e l , I.E. ~ h e P i a g e t i a n system an t h e world of educat ion . B I n D. Elkind & J . H . F l a v e l l ( E ~ s . ) , S t u d i e s i n c o g n i t i v e - -development- m w Y o r k r f ) X h ~ c ? u n i v . YP~SS, 13169.pppp

r

S i g e l , I.E., & Cocking, R.R. Cognitive development from c h i l d - hood t o adolescence: a c o n s t r u c t i v i s t pe r spec t ive . New York: Halt, Rinehar t & Winston, 1977.

Simon, A . , & Boyer, E . G . M i r r o r s f o r behav io r 11. P h i l a - d e l p h i a : Classroom I n t e r a c t i o n N e w s l e t t e r , Research f o r B e t t e r Schoo l s , 1970.

Smith, 3.0. ,Toward a t h e o r y of t e a c h i n g . 1h A.A. Be l l ack . (Ed.) Theary and r e s e a r c h i n t each ing . New York:

Teachers Co l l ege P r e s s , 1963.

Smith, P . J . P i a g e t i n h igh schoo l i n s t r u c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Chemical Educa t ion , 1978, 55, 115-118. -

T a l l e y , L.H. The %se of th ree-d imens iona l v i s u a l i z a t i o n a s a moderator i n t h e h i g h e r c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g of concep t s i n c o l l e g e l e v e l chemis t ry . J o u r n a l o f Research i n Sc i ence Teaching, 1973, 1 0 , . 263-269. -

T i s h e r , R.P. A P i a g e t i a n q u e s t i o n n a i r e a p p l i e d t o k p i l s ' i n a secondary schoo l . Chi ld Development, 1971, 4 2 , 1633-1636. -

T r a v e r s , R.M.W. E s s e n t i a l s of l e a r n i n g . ( 4 t h e d . ) New York: Macmillan P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1977.

Wheeler, A . E . , & Kass, 'PI. P r o p o r t i o n a l r ea son ing i n i n t r o - duc to ry hi$h s c h o o l chemis t ry . Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e

' f i f t i e t h annual meet ing of t h e Na t iona l ~ s s o c i a t i o n f o r Research i n Sc i ence Teaching. C i n c i n a t t i , Ohio, March 1977, Mimeographed.

Wilson, J . T . Expanded a b s t r a c t and a n a l y s i s of a s t u d y by Lawson, A.E. & J . W . Renner. I n S . L . Hegelson & P.E. B l o s s e r ; ( E d s . ) , L n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n s c i e n c e e d u c a t i o n , 1977, 3 , 11-15. E.D.R.S. document No. 157 778. -

Wollman, W . , & Karp lus , R. I n t e l l e c t u a l development beyond e lementary schoo l V: Using r a t i o i n d i f f e r i n g t a s k s . School Sc i ence andPMathemat ics , 1974, 74, 593-611. -

Wollman, W.T., & Lawson, A . E . The i n f l u e n c e o f i n s t r u c t i o n on p r o p o r t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g i n s even th g r a d e r s . J o u r n a l of Research i n Sc i ence Teaching, 1978, 1 5 , 227-232. -